State v. Cole

295 N.W.2d 29 (1980)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

State v. Cole

Iowa Supreme Court
295 N.W.2d 29 (1980)

  • Written by Nicole Gray , JD

Facts

In September 1977, Mary Kathleen Cole (plaintiff) shot and killed her ex-husband at a clinic where he worked. After Cole was taken into custody, a magistrate judge ordered psychiatric and physical examinations of Cole to determine her physical and mental fitness to proceed with trial. Cole was examined by two doctors pursuant to the order. During Cole’s prosecution for first-degree murder, Cole gave notice that she intended to use the diminished-capacity defense, and the State of Iowa (defendant) sought to obtain psychiatric evidence from the two doctors who examined Cole pursuant to the court’s order. Over Cole’s objections, the trial court allowed both doctors to provide pretrial depositions and allowed one to testify at trial on the state’s behalf. Cole was convicted. Cole appealed her conviction, arguing that admissibility of the psychiatric evidence was erroneous because the communications were protected by physician-patient privilege. The doctors were not Cole’s treating physicians. However, Cole argued that the privilege applied because the court-ordered examinations constituted treatment, given that she was suicidal.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Larson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership