The following excerpt is from U.S. v. McBride, 786 F.2d 45 (2nd Cir. 1986):
These reasons do not suffice to provide a legitimate basis for excluding the proffered evidence. It cannot be gainsaid that psychiatry enjoys general acceptance in the field of medicine. See Ake v. Oklahoma, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 1096-97, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985) ("[P]sychiatrists ideally assist lay jurors, who generally have no training in psychiatric matters, to make a sensible and educated determination about the mental conditions of the defendant at the time of the offense."). The mere fact that there may be conflicting testimony by experts is not a sufficient basis to exclude such evidence. Indeed, not uncommonly, there is conflict among experts on most any subject.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.