Opinion ID: 1842908
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: did the denial of funds for independent experts deprive butler of her rights?

Text: Butler contends her motion for funds to hire the services of a psychiatrist and an investigator should have been granted, citing Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985). Butler was evaluated by a psychiatrist from the State Hospital at Whitfield. This satisfied the constitutional mandate of [ Ake v. Oklahoma ]. Willie v. State, 585 So.2d 660, 671 (Miss. 1991). Furthermore, Butler failed to show substantial need for an investigator. Something more than undeveloped assertions that the requested assistance would be beneficial is required. Hansen v. State, 592 So.2d 114, 125 (Miss. 1991), cert. denied ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 1970, 118 L.Ed.2d 570 (1992)k reh'g. denied 1992 WL 143119 (1990). The lawyer should state specifically why he needs an investigator. Why should an investigator be necessary to perform tasks an attorney ordinarily performs? The circuit court did not abuse its discretion by denying Butler's request. Id.; Griffin v. State, 557 So.2d 542, 550-51 (Miss. 1990).