State v. Clark
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtYu, J.
¶1 At his trial for premeditated first degree murder, petitioner Anthony Tyrone Clark sought to introduce expert testimony regarding his intellectual deficits. Clark asserted this testimony would be relevant to contesting the State’s mens rea evidence and to helping the jury understand Clark’s affect while testifying. The trial court excluded Clark’s proffered expert testimony, but it did allow relevant observation testimony about Clark’s education history, Social Security disability benefits, affect, and actions on the day of the murder.
¶2 We hold that the trial court properly exercised its…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- State v. JonesWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. JonesWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. CoeWashington Supreme Court · 1984
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by81 opinions
- State v. ArndtWashington Supreme Court · 2019
- State Of Washington, V Mason BlairCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
- State Of Washington, V Michael Ray HornCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
- State of Washington v. Corey Michael BurnamCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
- State Of Washington, Appellant/cross-resp v. Cory Pratt, Resp./cross-appellantCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.