Court Opinion

ID: 9681379
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 07:49:19.282605+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:33.679035
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
MORRISON, Judge.
*60In a highly professional brief and oral argument, appellant urges that we were in error in our original holding that he was not under the Constitution of the United States entitled to the appointment of a psychiatrist, to be compensated by the state for his examination of appellant and for his time while testifying, in the event he concluded that appellant was a person of unsound mind. This court does not turn a deaf ear to appellant’s claims of his constitutional rights, as will be seen from our opinion in which we granted relief to him in Ex parte Bush, 313 S.W. 2d 287. But we are not inclined to extend the holding of the Supreme Court of the United States in U. S. ex rel Smith v. Baldi, 344 U.S. 561, 73 S. Ct. 391, 97 L. ed. 549, when that court said, “We cannot say that the state has that duty by constitutional mandate.”
Appellant next contends that we erred in our disposition of his complaint as to the court’s charge on the question of insanity. What we attempted to say was that the question of appellant’s sanity, and thus his ability to make a rational defense, was decided adversely to him on April 24 and that it became unnecessary to re-adjudicate that question on April 25.
Remaining convinced that we properly disposed of this cause originally, appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.