Due Process Clause Does Not Guarantee Right to Present Expert Evidence on Mens Rea
The Supreme Court held today, in Clark v. Arizona, No. 05-5966 (U.S. June 29, 2006), that the Due Process Clause is not offended by a state evidentiary regime permitting expert testimony in support of an insanity defense but barring its use to negate mens rea.
Press coverage undoubtedly will focus mostly on today's other Supreme Court disposition, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (U.S. June 29, 2006). But in terms of practical realities in the day-to-day administration of justice in this country, the Clark decision may well be the more significant.
We'll have more on Clark after we've studied the decision more carefully.
Update 6/30/06: Here's today's SCOTUSblog writeup on Clark.
Update 7/8/06: And here's Emily Bazelon's take in Slate.
Press coverage undoubtedly will focus mostly on today's other Supreme Court disposition, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 05-184 (U.S. June 29, 2006). But in terms of practical realities in the day-to-day administration of justice in this country, the Clark decision may well be the more significant.
We'll have more on Clark after we've studied the decision more carefully.
Update 6/30/06: Here's today's SCOTUSblog writeup on Clark.
Update 7/8/06: And here's Emily Bazelon's take in Slate.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home