Kevin Coe v. Larry Kincheloe, Superintendent

5 F.3d 535 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Kevin COE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry KINCHELOE, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee. No. 92-35253. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 13, 1993. Aug. 25, 1993. Before: CANBY, WIGGINS, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * A. Post-Hypnotic Testimony 2 Admission of post-hypnotic testimony is not a per se constitutional violation. United States v. Adams, 581 F.2d 193, 198 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1006 (1978). Hypnosis "may affect the credibility of evidence but not its admissibility." United States v. Awkard, 597 F.2d 667, 669 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 885 (1979). 3 The Superior Court was painstaking in its review of the testimony of the hypnotized witnesses. The court specifically found that the three witnesses' "testimony identifying Mr. Coe is solely based on prehypnotic memory and has not been tainted by hypnosis." These are "basic, primary or…