CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Opinion & Scientific Evidence
......Forensic Issues
.........Hypnosis
............Shirley Rule: Hypnotized Subj. Test.
12 Cards On This Topic:

Testimony re subject of hypnosis not admissible.

Shirley rule does not apply to D's testimony.

Hypnotized witness not incompetent re non-hypnotized topic.

Hypnosis may still be used as investigative tool. Evidence discovered by police investigation not ipso facto rendered inadmissible by prior hypnosis.

Error in admitting hypnosis testimony is assessed by Watson test.

Rule excluding all posthypnosis testimony infringes impermissibly on D's right to testify on own behalf.

No error in precluding testimony of W where his testimony, testimony of those who witnessed the sessions, and expert testimony amply supported trial court's determination that W was not hypnotized w/in meaning of P. v. Shirley.

Evidence of sexual harassment, based solely on memories recalled during hypnosis, is inadmissible.

E may not reasonably rely on D's statements under hypnosis to determine D's mental state at time of crime; opinion of PTSD expert properly excluded when based on D's statements under hypnosis.

Criminal D's submission to pretrial hypnosis will not render testimony inadmissible; DA not entitled to discovery of D's statements to hypnotist.

Extensive voir dire does not eliminate Shirley concerns.

Shirley rule retroactive to all cases not final.