Skip to content
Name: Verdin v. Superior Court
Case #: E038165
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 03/24/2006
Subsequent History: 6/14/06: rev. granted: S143040
Summary

An order for a defendant to submit to a mental examination by prosecution experts is not a form of discovery prohibited by the criminal discovery statutes. After the preliminary hearing in this attempted murder prosecution, the defense indicated that it would raise a “diminished actuality” defense under Penal Code section 28. The trial court granted the prosecution’s motion for an order for the defendant to submit to a mental examination by the prosecution’s expert, and the defendant filed a petition seeking to set aside the order on the grounds that such an examination is not permitted by Penal Code section 1054. The appellate court denied the writ, noting that since such compelled examinations were permitted prior to the passage of Proposition 115, and the intent of Proposition 115 was to “re-open the two-way street of reciprocal discovery,” it would be anomalous to deny discovery that was permitted prior to the passage of that initiative.