reasoning that expert testimony as to battered person syndrome was "not introduced to improperly bolster the credibility of the defendant, but rather, to aid the jury in evaluating the defendant’s behavior and state of mind given the abusive environment which existed”
How later courts described this case
- reasoning that expert testimony as to battered person syndrome was "not introduced to improperly bolster the credibility of the defendant, but rather, to aid the jury in evaluating the defendant’s behavior and state of mind given the abusive environment which existed”
- holding that evidence of battered woman syndrome was admissible in homicide trial as probative evidence of defendant's state of mind as it relates to a theory of self-defense
- considering report that Miller suffered from battered woman syndrome
- where self- defense was properly at issue in the case, then expert testimony regarding “battered woman syndrome” was relevant to prove the defendant’s state of mind as it relates to an element of a theory of self-defense
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ROWLEY, President Judge,
concurring.
I join in the Majority’s decision in all regards, save for its statement “that [battered woman syndrome] evidence is admissible [in a homicide trial] as probative evidence of the defendant’s state of mind as it relates to a theory of self-defense.” It is my belief that the Majority’s conclusion in this regard is dicta because it is unnecessary to a disposition of the instant appeal. A specific holding concerning the admissibility of battered woman syndrome evidence in homicide cases is better left for a day when that issue has been squarely presented to this Court.
TAMILIA and POPOVICH, JJ., join in this concurring statement by ROWLEY, P.J.