State v. Van Dyken

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “a defendant can properly be convicted of deliberate homicide even though he may not have intended that the death result from the act where he contemplated the same kind of harm or injury to the victim.”
• precluding defense mental health expert from repeating homicide defendant’s version of events in support of expert’s opinion that defendant was incapable of forming requisite criminal intent
• precluding defense mental health expert from repeating homicide defendant’s version of events in support of 11 expert’s opinion that defendant was incapable of forming requisite criminal intent
• “expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination”
• “expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination”
• “[i]t is no longer necessary to prove specific intent as an element of the crime unless the statute defining the offense requires as an element thereof specific purpose”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).