Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCarnes, Brittany A.-
dc.identifier.citation65 Loy. L. Rev. 223en_US
dc.description.abstractThe admissibility of “battered woman’s syndrome” (BWS) evidence and related expert testimony has been the subject of nationwide debate, particularly with respect to insanity defenses. This debate has focused mainly on the word “syndrome,” which seems to suggest that a defendant relying on the defense in any given criminal case is suffering from an actual, discernable mental illness. The admissibility of such evidence was at the heart of the Louisiana Supreme Court’s opinion in State v. Curley. Prior to this decision, Louisiana courts treated the admissibility of BWS evidence in a nonuniform manner, where some courts admitted it absent an insanity plea, while other courts expressly forbade it. In Curley, the court held, once and for all, that pursuant to Louisiana Code of Evidence article 404(A), BWS evidence and related expert testimony are permissible in cases in which the defendant pleads insanity or self-defense, not just the former. The defendant in Curley was ultimately awarded a new trial at which evidence of past abuse she suffered at the hands of her husband, the murder victim, was allowed to come in. Curley is significant because it clarified the important role of BWS evidence in trials of abused women who are accused of committing violent crimes against their abusers.en_US
dc.publisherLoyola University New Orleans College of Lawen_US
dc.subjectbattered woman's syndromeen_US
dc.titleState v. Curley: Modernizing Battered Woman's Syndrome in Louisianaen_US
Appears in Collections:Law Review

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Carnes.Final Spring 19 (1).pdf306.77 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.