Doe

Doe v. Superior Court

Caution
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 1027·39 Cal. App. 4th 538·45 Cal. Rptr. 2d 888·95 Daily Journal DAR 14242·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8276
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 23, 1995B094986California2,314 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

The question in this case is whether an indigent defendant admittedly entitled to and in need of an appointed expert can be denied her choice of experts solely because the one with the expertise she needs is not on the trial court’s “approved” panel of expert psychiatrists and psychologists—notwithstanding that (as far as we can tell) none of the “approved" panel members have experience in the specialty needed for this defendant’s case. On these facts, our answer is "no."

Background

This is a death penalty case in which Jane Doe is charged with murder, with a special circumstance allegation. In preparation for trial, Jane’s defense counsel applied to the trial court for the appointment of Dr. Nancy Kaser-Boyd, an expert on Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The request was denied on the ground that Dr. Kaser-Boyd is not on the court’s panel of approved psychiatrists and psychologists. Defense counsel renewed the application two or three times, elaborating on Jane’s particular problems and providing a list of the several dozen courts (in Los Angeles County) in which Dr. Kaser-Boyd has testified.

Defense counsel explained that he had…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.