In the 2013 case Kansas v. Cheever, Scott D. Cheever was charged with capital murder for shooting and killing a sheriff who attempted to arrest him on an unrelated charge. During his trial in state court, he presented expert testimony suggesting that his methamphetamine use had rendered him incapable of premeditation - a necessary element for conviction under Kansas law. The prosecution sought to rebut this defense by presenting its own expert witness who had examined Cheever pursuant to a federal-court ordered mental evaluation when he faced earlier (dismissed) federal charges related to the same incident. The Supreme Court of Kansas held that this violated Cheever's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because he did not voluntarily submit himself for examination by the government’s psychiatrist. The U.S Supreme Court unanimously reversed this decision, holding that once a defendant presents expert evidence claiming lack of requisite intent due to impaired mental condition, they cannot then prevent the prosecution from countering with their own psychological evidence derived from an examination conducted by their experts.

In the Supreme Court case Kansas v. Cheever, there was no dissenting opinion recorded as the decision was unanimous. The court ruled 9-0 in favor of Kansas, allowing prosecutors to use a psychiatric evaluation from a court-ordered mental exam as evidence against Scott Cheever who had used an insanity defense in his trial for murder charges. This ruling clarified that defendants cannot prevent the state from using psychiatric evaluations if they themselves have presented expert testimony supporting their claim of insanity or impaired ability to form criminal intent.