Tolbert v. State, S90A1425
| Citation | 260 Ga. 527,397 S.E.2d 439 |
| Decision Date | 08 November 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. S90A1425,S90A1425 |
| Parties | TOLBERT v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Daniel J. Sammons, Gainesville, for Tolbert.
C. Andrew Fuller, Dist. Atty., Gainesville, for State.
1. (a) John Tolbert was indicted for malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, and escape. Prior to his indictment, the trial court, under authority of Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.5, ordered a mental evaluation. The report of a psychiatrist at Central State Hospital stated that Tolbert had been under the influence of a delusional compulsion at the time of the incidents here involved. Two days before his indictment, Tolbert filed a notice of intent to raise the defense of insanity. On the date of the indictment, the state moved for a psychiatric evaluation. The trial court--after finding that the requirements of OCGA § 17-7-130.1 had been met and that it was not necessary to appoint an independent psychiatrist or psychologist--ordered that the state might require Tolbert to be examined by a psychiatrist of its choice. We granted interlocutory review.
(b) Tolbert contends that he had complied with a state-requested psychological evaluation, which was performed by the state's expert; that the results of the first evaluation were exculpatory; and that he may not be compelled to undergo a second mental evaluation at the behest of the state.
2. (a) "Whether to grant the motion [for a second psychiatric examination] was in the discretion of the trial court ... [Cit.]." Smith v. State, 245 Ga. 44, 46(2), 262 S.E.2d 806 (1980). That determination "will not be overturned unless an abuse of discretion is shown [Cit.]." Cunningham v. State, 248 Ga. 558, 560(4), 284 S.E.2d 390 (1981).
(b) When Tolbert filed notice of his insanity defense, the court was required under the terms of OCGA § 17-7-130.1 to appoint "at least one psychiatrist or licensed psychologist to examine the defendant and to testify at the trial." A court-appointed medical expert cannot be classified as an agent of the state, but must be considered as an independent and impartial witness. The same rule applies to a medical expert, appointed prior to indictment, whose professional opinion might be needed so that the court is enabled to fashion a proper disposition of matters before it. See, e.g., Motes v. State, 256 Ga. 831, 353 S.E.2d 348 (1987):
[I]f a defendant wants to tell his story to a jury through the mouth of an expert, the state should have an equal opportunity to tell that story through the mouth of an expert.... [Id. at 833, 353 S.E.2d 348.]
3. (a) A contrary rule would make the opinion of a single medical expert witness...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bright v. State
...to OCGA § 17-7-130.1, the trial court appointed a psychiatrist "to examine [him] and to testify at the trial." Tolbert v. State, 260 Ga. 527, 528(2)(b), 397 S.E.2d 439 (1990). Despite the majority's reasoning, there is no authority which would preclude the trial court from ordering that the......
-
Brannan v. State
...the State and, therefore, that he was not the neutral court-appointed expert contemplated by OCGA § 17-7-130.1. See Tolbert v. State, 260 Ga. 527, 528, 397 S.E.2d 439 (1990) ("A court-appointed medical expert cannot be classified as an agent of the state, but must be considered as an indepe......
-
Waldrip v. State
...to object did not constitute waiver of this issue, the witness explained that under this Court's opinion in Tolbert v. State, 260 Ga. 527, 528(1)(b), 397 S.E.2d 439 (1990), he was required to be independent and 6. Appellant contends that the trial court erred by repeatedly allowing the Stat......
-
Henry v. State
...illnesses. After the State presented expert witnesses in rebuttal, the trial court, relying on OCGA § 17-7-130.1 and Tolbert v. State, 260 Ga. 527, 397 S.E.2d 439 (1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 921, 111 S.Ct. 2025, 114 L.Ed.2d 111 (1991) called and examined Dr. Trice. Henry contends the tri......