ROCK V. ARKANSAS
483 U.S. 44 (1987)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal of a conviction for voluntary manslaughter.
FACTS: Rock (D) shot her husband during an argument. D could not remember what had
happened, so she consented to hypnosis. D was hypnotized twice by Doctor Back, a licensed
neuro-psychologist with training in the field of hypnosis. Both hypnosis sessions were
recorded on tape. D did not relate any new information during either of the sessions, but,
after the hypnosis, she was able to remember that at the time of the incident she had her
thumb on the hammer of the gun, but had not held her finger on the trigger. She also
recalled that the gun had discharged when her husband grabbed her arm during the scuffle. An
expert examined the gun, and determined that it was defective. He claimed that it could fire
when handled despite the trigger not being pulled. The expert produced his testimony at
trial, then was followed by D offering her hypnotically-refreshed testimony. The trial court
excluded the recollections of D under an Arkansas law that disallowed hypnotically refreshed
memory. D was convicted. D appealed, and her conviction was affirmed. The Supreme Court
accepted review. D claims that her testimony was impermissibly excluded which violated her
constitutional right to testify in her own defense.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment