In what circumstances will a hypnotized witness be allowed to give evidence at trial?

Finally, in People v. Blair (1979) 25 Cal.3d 640, 665, 159 Cal.Rptr. 818, 602 P.2d 738, we upheld a ruling excluding a tape recording of statements made by a defense witness while hypnotized and offered under the hearsay exception for past recollection recorded. We distinguished Modesto on the ground that such statements may be admissible as a basis for an expert opinion, and reaffirmed the Ebanks rule that they are otherwise inadmissible for the truth of the matters asserted "because the reliability of such statements is questionable." Even though the witness was not the defendant but a disinterested observer, we explained that "The fact that she was a neutral person and had no reason to falsify her statements under hypnosis and that she intended to tell the truth are obviously insufficient to establish reliability, especially in the light of expert testimony that there is no way to determine if a person under hypnosis is relating actual facts." (Italics added.) (Id. at pp. 665-666, 159 Cal.Rptr. 818, 602 P.2d 738.)