This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
In a murder trial where the defense is insanity and the court, upon motion of the accused, with the consent of the district attorney, appoints a physician to make an examination, and to testify on the trial, as the mental condition of the accused, the Supreme Court of Colorado holds, in the case of Nesbit v. People, decided March 7, 1894, that an examination and consultation between the accused and the physician, under such circumstances, are not confidential, and that the physician can be called by the State to testify in rebuttal, even though he has not been called by the accused. It can not be, it is said, that an accused can seek and obtain such an 'examination at the hands of the court, and with the consent of the prosecution, with the privilege of introducing the testimony if the result of the examination shall be favorable to him,
MUTUAL CONSULTATIONS ARE NOT CONFIDENTIAL.. JAMA. 1894;XXII(20):757. doi:10.1001/jama.1894.02420990031007