Many states have statutes similar to this, but with different names. It is the law controlling sentencing in many child abuse proceedings.
In the Matter of the MARRIAGE OF Jeffrey E. HUTCHISON, Appellee, and Karen L. WRAY, f/k/a Karen L. Hutchison, Appellant.
This decision drew a very clear line between the responsibilities of forensic mental health professionals and the responsibilities of judges. It provoked the Kansas Supreme Court into rewriting the rules and regulations controlling case managers.
OPINIONS AND EDITORIALS
Continuing Education Promoting Collaborative Forensics
PUBLIC TRUST, MORALITY, AND FORENSICS
KANSAS COURT DECISIONS
IKFE promotes adequate practice by publishing items that may change the nature of what licensed professionals do or change the techniques the professionals use. In this way, the Institute helps attorneys and mental health professionals keep pace with the evolution of forensics.
Kansas judges always decide which professionals become expert witnesses as opposed to fact witnesses, but the Kansas legislature establishes guidelines judges use to make the distinctions. For decades the legislature allowed the courts to function with the Frye rule, but in the recent past the legislature changed to the Daubert rule. The Kansas Statutes at Chapter 60-456 contains the Daubert rule, but any reader interested in forensic practice should have a familiarity with all the Rules of Evidence, Chapter 60-4.
STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Rick F. GREGG, Appellant.
Even though this decision was made during the 1970's, it continues to many legal proceedings with child abuse allegations. Readers should become aware of the many subsequent decisions that cite Gregg.