Chapter 10 - § 10.9 HYPNOSIS

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 10.9 HYPNOSIS

Colorado

➢ Test for Admissibility. There is no per se rule of admissibility or inadmissibility. People v. Romero, 745 P.2d 1003, 1016 (Colo. 1987). Instead, "trial courts must make an individualized inquiry in each case to determine whether the trial testimony of a witness who has been hypnotized will be sufficiently reliable to qualify for admission."

Federal

➢ Guidelines for Admissibility. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down an Arkansas rule that post-hypnotic testimony was per se inadmissible because it violated a criminal defendant's right to testify on his own behalf. Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (1987). The Court noted that the use of procedural safeguards could reduce the inaccuracies in testimony that hypnosis can cause. The Court suggested the following guidelines: (1) the hypnosis should be performed by a psychologist or psychiatrist who is independent of the investigation and has special training in the use of hypnosis; (2) the hypnosis should be conducted in a neutral setting with no one present but the hypnotist and the subject; and (3) all of the interrogation, before,

...