Isom v. State, 6 Div. 699
Decision Date | 28 January 1986 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 699 |
Citation | 488 So.2d 12 |
Parties | Alphonzo ISOM v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Victor L. Miller, Jr., Birmingham, for appellant.
Charles A. Graddick, Atty. Gen. and Cecil G. Brendle, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Alphonzo Isom was convicted for robbery in the first degree and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. On appeal he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a psychiatric evaluation at the State's expense.
The defendant pled not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity to the indictment. On June 7, 1984, the Competency Evaluation Board at Taylor Hardin Secure Medical Facility found the defendant "competent for trial."
On July 23, 1984, defense counsel filed a "motion for appointment of named psychiatrist or psychologist to examine defendant at county expense." This motion specifically requested "that an order be granted directing the employment of Norman G. Poythress, Jr., Ph.D., psychologist, to assist the Defendant at the expense of the county." This request was denied. The record does not reflect that "[a] further oral motion was made before trial, before the Honorable William Cole for the appointment of the psychiatrist, which was denied," as stated in the Appellant's Brief, p. 19.
At trial, the defendant presented evidence that he was insane at the time of the robbery and also evidence of alibi. In Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 1092, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985), the Supreme Court of the United States held that "when a defendant has made a preliminary showing that his sanity at the time of the offense is likely to be a significant factor at trial, the Constitution requires that a State provide access to a psychiatrist's assistance on this issue, if the defendant cannot otherwise afford one."
Ake, 470 U.S. at ----, 105 S.Ct. at 1097, 84 L.Ed.2d 53.
Even under Ake, the defendant's motion was properly denied, as the indigent defendant does not have a constitutional right to choose a psychiatrist of his personal liking or to receive funds to hire his own. 470 U.S. at ----, 105 S.Ct. at 1097, 84 L.Ed.2d 53. See also Clark v. State, 467 So.2d 699, 702 (Fla.1985); Tuggle v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 99, 334...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Wang
...State v. Barnett, 909 S.W.2d 423, 427 (Tenn.1995); Taylor v. State, 939 S.W.2d 148, 152 (Tex.Crim.App.1996); but see Isom v. State, 488 So.2d 12, 13 (Ala.Crim.App.1986); Bannister v. State, 726 S.W.2d 821, 827–28 (Mo.App.1987). 15. See, e.g., Terry v. Rees, 985 F.2d 283, 284 (6th Cir.1993) ......
-
Moore v. State
...opinion of Chief Justice Burger in Ake, some courts have limited the application of Ake to capital cases. See, e.g., Isom v. State, 488 So.2d 12, 13 (Ala.Crim.App. 1986); Bannister v. State, 726 S.W.2d 821, 828-30 (Mo.App.1987). Chief Justice Burger stated as "The facts of the case and the ......
-
State v. Wang
...State v. Barnett, 909 S.W.2d 423, 427 (Tenn. 1995); Taylor v. State, 939 S.W.2d 148, 152 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); but see Isom v. State, 488 So. 2d 12, 13 (Ala. 1986); Bannister v. State, 726 S.W.2d 821, 827-28 (Mo. 1987). 15. See, e.g., Terry v. Rees, 985 F.2d 283, 284 (6th Cir. 1993) (path......
-
Nicks v. State
...a psychiatrist of his personal liking or to receive funds to hire his own,' Ake, 470 U.S. at 83, 105 S.Ct. at 1097; Isom v. State, 488 So.2d 12, 13 (Ala.Cr.App.1986)." Whittle v. State, 518 So.2d at In the present case, when the trial court became aware that Nicks's mental health might be a......
-
§ 24.17 RIGHT TO DEFENSE EXPERTS
...in a Post-Daubert, Post-DNA World, 89 Cornell L. Rev. 1305 (2004).[270] Ake, 470 U.S. at 76.[271] Id. at 74.[272] Compare Isom v. State, 488 So. 2d 12, 13 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986) ("Ake does not reach noncapital cases."), with State v. Taylor, 939 S.W.2d 148, 152 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) ("[W]e......
-
§ 24.08 Right to Defense Experts
...in a Post-Daubert, Post-DNA World, 89 Cornell L. Rev. 1305 (2004).[154] Ake, 470 U.S. at 76.[155] Id. at 74.[156] Compare Isom v. State, 488 So. 2d 12, 13 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986) ("Ake does not reach noncapital cases."), with State v. Taylor, 939 S.W.2d 148, 152 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) ("[W]e......