Lewis v. Thulemeyer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the legislative scheme governing sanity evaluations “carefully avoided the constitutional proscriptions against self-incrimination”
• concluding that the legislative scheme governing sanity evaluations \carefully avoided the constitutional proscriptions against self-incrimination\
• use of confession or admission in sanity trial does not aid in proof of guilt, but rather aids only in proof of sanity or insanity
• the use of statements of defendant by psychiatrist in forming opinion as to the sanity of defendant does not impact upon the proof of guilt; it is limited to the issue of sanity
• “We conclude [that permitting] the admission in evidence of defendant’s [compelled] statements to [a court-appointed] psychiatrist where Sanity is the issue, but barring them on the Guilt issue, does not violate the defendant’s rights against self-incrimination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).