State v. Yarbrough

¶1concurs, particularly noting that the sanity commission is not shown to have examined defendant as to capacity at the time of the alleged offenses; he is entitled to have an expert examination on the issue since the burden of proof is on him. C.Cr.P. arts. 650 and 652. Also important is the fact that he has a history of mental problems. See Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985).