People v. Teodosio CA5

FACTS

On February 7, 2013, a petition was filed seeking to extend Teodosio’s civil commitment as an MDO. His bench trial began on April 3, 2013 and, on April 9, the second day of trial and first day of testimony, the district attorney informed the court that it had learned on April 4 that Teodosio’s treating psychiatrist, Dr. Susan Ahart, was subject to a criminal investigation and had been placed on administrative leave. The district attorney further informed the court that the nature of the investigation was not yet known, and that Ahart intended to exercise her Fifth Amendment right against self- incrimination if questioned about the matter. The district attorney also stated that Teodosio’s previous psychiatrist, Dr. Amrit Saini, was available to testify in place of Ahart.

1Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83 (Brady).

2 After these disclosures were made, Ahart was called to the stand, where she confirmed that she would not answer any questions concerning the investigation. At that point, Teodosio’s counsel moved to exclude Ahart as a witness as Teodosio would be unable to fully cross-examine her. Teodosio also moved to exclude Ahart’s written reports; to prohibit Saini…