Abstract
Previous criticisms of compulsory mental examinations of criminal defendants have asserted that such a practice violates the defendant's privilege against self-incrimination. The author contends that such criticisms are based on over-simplified legal analysis and then sets forth a proposal which minimizes the possibility of in-court self-incrimination while the benefits of the examination are retained.
How to Cite
15 Ariz. L. Rev. 919 (1973)
100
Views
259
Downloads