www.charlesjeromeware.com. " We are here to make a difference. We fight, you win."
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has ruled that the 5th Amendment does not bar the prosecution in a criminal case from introducing evidence from a court-ordered mental exam of a defendant to rebut the defendant's methamphetamine defense.
The defendant, Scott Cheever, was convicted of fatally shooting a sheriff's deputy in a home where he was hiding after a friend warned him that police were on the way. defendant Cheever's lawyers had argued that his methamphetamine use made him incapable of premeditation and his long-time use of the drug had damaged his brain. The prosecution, however, rebutted the defense with evidence from a court-ordered psychiatric examination in an effort to show that Cheever was affected by his antisocial personality, rather than drug use.
The prosecution rebuttal evidence does not violate the 5th Amendment, wrote SCOTUS Justice Sonia Sotomayor for the unanimous court. " The [prosecution] permissibly followed where the defense led", she wrote in the opinion.
[KANSAS v. CHEEVER, No. 12-609, Decided December 11, 2013, SCOTUS; also cited at 571 U. S. _____ (2013); www.abajournal.com/news/article/Meth Intoxication Defense, December 11, 2013; and SCOTUSblog ]
No comments:
Post a Comment