Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Hawthorne

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1940No. Docket No. 117, Calendar No. 40,384Published

1ConcurrenceButzel, J.

I concur in affirmance, but 1 cannot agree with the proposition of my brother McAllister that because insanity is a disease and comes within the realm of medical science that only physicians are competent to answer hypothetical questions on behalf of a defendant in a criminal case. The law does not require a rule so formal, and I do not think we further the cause of justice by insisting that only a medical man may completely advise on the subject of mental condition. The proposed witness was a graduate of Tilton School in New Hampshire, Wesleyan University, Yale University; and Harvard…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. People v. ZabijakMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Evans v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1863
  3. People v. . RiceNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  4. McEwen v. BigelowMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  5. Kelley v. RichardsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1888

5 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