Castro v. State of Oklahoma
71 F. 3d 1502 (10th Cir. 1995)
Castro was convicted in state court of murder, and sentenced to
death. He brought a federal habeas corpus action seeking to overturn his
sentence.
The court of appeals held that the defendant was entitled to the
assistance of a court-appointed and paid for medical expert. Castro
argued that he needed such assistance to develop evidence regarding five
different problems, one of which was fetal alcohol syndrome or fetal
alcohol effect. (71 F. 2d at 1510). The specific type of expert he
sought was a psychiatrist. (A psychiatrist undoubtedly would have been
better qualified to evaluate several of Castro's other problems than to
evaluate possible FAS/FAE).
The court concluded that a criminal defendant was entitled to such
experts provided that he had made a substantial showing that his mental
state was in dispute and was relevant to the outcome of the case, either
to the guilt determination or to the sentence. (71 F. 3d at 1513-14).
Although one medical expert had been appointed, the court concluded he was
probably not qualified to assess the medical issues in the case. (71 F.
3d at 1515).
The court concluded that more complete information about Castro's
mental health might have persuaded the jury to vote against the death
penalty. (71 F. 3d at 1516).
URL:
http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/dec95/94-6430.html