Legal Opinion

Austin v. Alfred

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided February 27, 1990No. 2 CA-SA 90-0002PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ROLL, Presiding Judge.

Petitioner Mark Austin seeks special action relief from the respondent judge’s granting of the real party in interest State of Arizona’s motion to compel disclosure of names and reports of mental health experts retained by Austin in anticipation of an insanity defense. For the reasons stated below, we accept jurisdiction and grant partial relief, narrowing the scope of the trial court’s disclosure order.

FACTS

Austin was charged by indictment with first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, aggravated assault, and first-degree burglary. Austin submitted to…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  4. State v. BondsWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Tovrea Land and Cattle Company v. LinsenmeyerArizona Supreme Court · 1966

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. KnucklesIllinois Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State of Arizona v. James Clayton JohnsonArizona Supreme Court · 2019
  3. People v. KnucklesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1992
  4. State v. HegyiArizona Supreme Court · 2017
  5. People v. UlleryColorado Court of Appeals · 1997

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API