SMITH V. MURRAY
477 U.S. 527 (1986)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over discovery of mental health evaluations by the
defense.
FACTS: D was indicted for murder. Prior to trial, his attorney explored the possibility
of presenting a number of psychiatric defenses. D requested a private psychiatrist to
conduct an examination of D. During this examination, D was asked by the Dr. and responded
to questions regarding the rape. At no time was D informed by his Dr. that his answers would
be used against him at trial or that he could remain silent and have counsel present if
desired. D was convicted and at the sentencing phase of the trial, the Dr. was called to the
stand; recounted the rape story and his analysis that D was a sociopathic personality. D
objected. The Dr. was allowed to testify and D was sentenced to death. D appealed. D did not
appeal the Dr.'s testimony. However, that issue was raised in amicus curiae through the
Univ. of Va. Law School. The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the conviction but indicated
that it only reviewed errors advanced by amicus that were specifically addressed by D. The
Supreme Court denied certiorari, which did not include the issue of the Dr.'s testimony. D
then applied for a writ of habeas corpus in state court and then argued the wrongful
admission of the Dr.'s testimony. The court researched the issue of ineffective assistance
of counsel and found that D's attorney had made an informed, professional deliberation.
Habeas relief was denied and D appealed. They were denied. D then applied for federal habeas
relief.
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