## Facts

- Pamela J. Knuckles was charged in Du Page County, Illinois, with the 1984 murder of her mother by strangulation and suffocation.
- Shortly after the homicide, defense counsel obtained court authorization to retain a psychiatrist to interview Knuckles for defense preparation.
- A psychiatrist, Dr. Kyle Rossiter, interviewed Knuckles in jail about two weeks after the murder at defense counsel’s request and prepared notes/impressions.
- Knuckles initially pleaded guilty, but the plea was vacated for ineffective assistance of counsel based on misinformation about death-penalty exposure.
- After the State reinstated charges for trial, the prosecution subpoenaed Dr. Rossiter for his notes and testimony.
- The defense disclosed other mental-health experts it expected to call at trial and stated it did not intend to call Dr. Rossiter.
- Knuckles moved to quash the subpoenas and to bar the State from obtaining or using Dr. Rossiter’s notes and testimony; the trial court granted the motion.
- The appellate court affirmed; the State sought and obtained review in the Illinois Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether communications between a criminal defendant and a psychiatrist retained by defense counsel to assist in preparing an insanity defense are protected by the attorney-client privilege when the psychiatrist is not a trial witness.
2. Whether the psychiatrist’s notes and impressions prepared for defense counsel are protected from disclosure by the attorney work-product doctrine under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 412(j)(i).
3. Whether asserting an insanity defense or disclosing other mental-health experts as trial witnesses waives any privilege as to a defense-retained psychiatrist not intended to testify.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the order quashing the State’s subpoenas.
- Communications between Knuckles and Dr. Rossiter were protected by the attorney-client privilege because the psychiatrist functioned as an agent assisting counsel in providing legal services and was not a testifying witness.
- Dr. Rossiter’s notes and impressions were also protected as defense work product under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 412(j)(i).
- No waiver occurred merely because Knuckles raised an insanity defense or disclosed other expert witnesses; waiver, if any, applied only to experts the defense intended to call at trial.

## Legal Principles

- The attorney-client privilege extends to confidential communications made to professionals retained by counsel to assist in legal representation, including non-testifying psychiatric consultants used for defense preparation.
- Statutory physician-patient or therapist-patient privileges do not displace attorney-client protection when the psychiatric evaluation is sought by counsel for litigation purposes rather than treatment.
- Under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 412(j)(i), materials prepared for counsel that contain opinions, theories, or conclusions of the defense team—including reports and notes of consulting experts—are protected work product and generally not discoverable.
- Raising an insanity defense does not automatically waive privilege and work-product protections as to non-testifying consulting experts; disclosure obligations turn on whether the expert will testify.

## Conclusion

The court held that a psychiatrist retained by defense counsel solely to assist in evaluating and preparing an insanity defense is a privileged, non-testifying consultant, and the prosecution may not compel that psychiatrist’s testimony or notes absent waiver through designation as a trial witness.


People v. Knuckles, 165 Ill. 2d 125, 650 N.E.2d 974 (Ill. 1995)