Perry v. Commonwealth
Kentucky Supreme Court
1DissentVenters, J.
I cannot join the Majority opinion because I believe it deviates from our well-established rules for evaluating the compe*135teney of a -witness pursuant to KRE 601, Mack v. Commonwealth, 860 S.W.2d 275 (Ky.1993), and Bart v. Commonwealth, 951 S.W.2d 576, 579 (Ky.1997). The Majority opinion substantially weakens the wall that protects witnesses from the unwarranted and humiliating intrusion of exploratory mental health evaluations, especially victims in rape and sexual abuse cases, and will further discourage victims and witnesses from reporting crimes and testifying against their assailants.
As…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. Anthony C. Zizzo, James J. Marcello, Richard Gervasio, Anthony N. Chiaramonti, Brett K. O'dell, and Samuel A. CarlisiCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- Staton v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1981
- United States v. MargolisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1943
- Turner v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1988
- Burton v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2009
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.