EX PARTE HICKS: MENTAL HEALTH AND DEPRIVATION OF COUNSEL IN CAPITAL MURDER: ALABAMA SUPREME COURT QUASHES WRIT IN FAVOR OF STATE OF ALABAMA IN CAPITAL MURDER CASE.

The article focuses on the Alabama Supreme Court's decision in *Ex parte Hicks*, which addressed a death row inmate's claim that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when he underwent a pretrial mental evaluation without legal representation. The court acknowledged the violation but ruled that it did not warrant automatic reversal, applying the harmless error standard from *Chapman v. California* and *Satterwhite v. Texas*. The court also rejected the inmate's argument that the admission of the mental health evaluator's testimony during the penalty phase prejudiced him, finding no substantial impact on the verdict. Ultimately, the court quashed the writ, upholding the conviction and sentence.