Defendant’s Motion for Appointment of Expert 
to Perform a Neuropsychological Examination 
on Defendant
Mark D. Griffith
CAUSE NO. _______________
STATE OF TEXAS	§	IN THE ____ JUDICIAL
	§	
vs.	§	DISTRICT COURT OF
	§	
_______________________	§	_____________ COUNTY, TEXAS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
	NOW COMES, ____________________, by and through her court-appointed attorney, Mark D. Griffith, and files this Motion and in support of such would show the Court the following:
I.
	The defendant stands charged with the offense of Injury to a Child, a felony, and has been found to be indigent and this Court appointed counsel to represent the Defendant. The Defendant does not have the funds to employ the requested experts.
II.
	The indictment in this case alleges that the act of injury to a child was committed by the defendant by an act of omission, namely, “by allowing another person to abuse the child, and the defendant had a statutory duty to act, namely, reporting a felony offense as required by Penal Code Section 38.171.”
III.
	There is a pending TDPRS case in the County Court at Law ___ of __________ County involving the facts that resulted in the criminal charges in this case. Pursuant to a Court Order in the TDPRS case a psychological evaluation was performed on the Defendant and a copy was provided to her counsel and is attached to this Motion and incorporated for all purposes as “Exhibit A.” An intelligence test was also performed.
	Relevant sections of the report state as follows:
	“On the vocabulary subtest, she performed at a functional age of approximately of 9½ years.”
	“____________’s verbal performance shows different characteristics than the typical 9- or 10-year-old child. She/he appears to recognize words, however she/he appears to have difficulty applying higher-level abstractions to verbal meaning. It is possible that her/his ability to engage in higher-level abstract thinking may not be as good as a 9- or 10-year-old child. This may need to be confirmed with more extensive neuropsychological examination. One implication of this deficit in abstract reasoning ability is that her/his capacity to generalize may be significantly impaired.”
	“A deficit in this area may have a serious impact on an individual’s ability to engage in critical thinking and problem-solving skills.”
	“The analysis of her/his performance IQ cannot yield straightforward conclusions out of context of a broader array of test results from neuropsychological testing or other neurological examinations.”
	“__________ reported that one side of her/his brain was the size of a “Walnut.” She/he appears to have neuro-muscular abnormalities on her/his right side with severe problems evident in her/his right hand. Her/his right hand appears to be in a state of muscular underdevelopment and muscular constriction. It is likely that the left side of her/his brain is damaged, the side of her/his brain that controls the verbal centers as well as the muscular development and control of the right side of her/his body.”
	“The 24-point discrepancy between her/his verbal and performance IQ is typically an indication of brain damage and learning disabilities that require remediation. This represents a situation not found in the normal (or mainstream) population, and this particular point spread is very unusual and extreme.”
IV.
	Based on the foregoing information and the information found in “Exhibit A,” counsel for the Defendant feels that the issues developed regarding brain damage and severe deficits in critical thinking Defendant needs to have a neuropsychological evaluation be performed to determine whether the particular brain damage and deficits suffered by the Defendant could in fact render her/him incapable of criminal omission as alleged in the indictment in this case due to the brain damage and her/his problems with critical thinking.
	WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant prays that this Court grant this Motion and appoint Dr. __________________, a clinical neurophsychologist, to perform a neurophsychological profile of the Defendant to determine the magnitude of the suspected brain damage and further to analyze whether the Defendant has the cognitive ability to develop the mens rea as alleged in the indictment so that all guilt/innocence issues may be addressed along with any mitigation evidence the testing my uncover with regards to brain damage. The cost of said testing would be $____________. The curriculum vitae of Dr. ____________________ is attached as Exhibit B.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

Mark D. Griffith
Attorney for Defendant
108 West Main Street
Waxahachie, Texas 75165
State Bar # 00785928
(972) 937-9555
(972) 938-8333 (fax)

FIAT SETTING HEARING
	On this the _____ day of ____________________, came on to be presented the above entitled Motion and it is the ORDER of this Court that said Motion be and hereby is set for a hearing on the:

	_____ day of _________________, 201__ at _________ o’clock __.m.

	Signed this the _____ day of _________________, 201__.

_______________________________________
JUDGE PRESIDING

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
	I, MARK D. GRIFFITH, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was hand-delivered to the District Attorney handling the case on this the ______ day of ___________________, 201__.

_______________________________________
Mark D. Griffith