State v. Poulson, 10208
| Decision Date | 07 December 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 10208,10208 |
| Citation | 397 P.2d 70,16 Utah 2d 151 |
| Parties | d 151 STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Darrel Devere POULSON, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Wm. G. Fowler, Salt Lake City (appointed by court), for appellant.
A. Pratt Kesler, Atty. Gen., Ronald N. Boyce, Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for respondent.
On December 14, 1961, defendant Darrell Devere Poulson was convicted of murder in the first degree. That conviction was affirmed by this Court. 1
On May 8, 1964, defendant filed with the district court a Petition for a Writ of Coram Vobis on the ground that failure of the three duly appointed alienists to fully and independently examine the defendant constituted a substantial and material denial of due process of law.
At a hearing called to consider the petition the three appointed alienists, Dr. Carl Kivler, Dr. Louis A. Moench, and Dr. C. H. Hardin Branch, testified.
Dr. Kivler testified that after he had completed his examination of the defendant, having examined him on five or six occasions, and after he had reached his own decision in evaluating the case, he received a copy of a letter from Dr. Moench. The letter was also addressed to Dr. Branch and, as he recalled, contained Dr. Moench's evaluation of the case which in general agreed with his evaluation. He also stated that he did not change his opinion of the case after receiving the letter, and he did not remember whether anything in the letter differed from his opinion.
Dr. Moench testified that he had examined the defendant on one occasion, that he had forwarded to the other alienists a note and details of his examination of the defendant. He stated that he had received information from both Dr. Kivler and Dr. Branch, had familiarized himself with it, but did not change his opinion as to the degree of mental retardation because of information received from any other source, and his testimony in earlier proceedings was not based upon information from other sources.
Dr. Branch testified that he did not testify at the original trial, that he had examined the defendant on one occasion, that he had not communicated with Dr. Kivler but had communicated with Dr. Moench. He acknowledged receipt of a typewritten note from Dr. Moench. He stated that information he received from Dr. Ija Korner, defense counsel's expert witness, and Dr. Moench 'contributed in one way or another' to his final report.
The district court denied the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Poulson v. Turner
...of the United States. 375 U.S. 898, 84 S.Ct. 177, 11 L.Ed.2d 126. After exhausting his remedies in the state court — State v. Poulson, 16 Utah 2d 151, 397 P.2d 70, cert. denied 381 U.S. 947, 85 S.Ct. 1795, 14 L.Ed.2d 710, — Poulson instituted this habeas corpus proceeding in the United Stat......