Former Letcher County Sheriff Seeks To Block Second Psychiatric Exam After Announcing Mental-Health Defense

Attorneys for former Letcher County Sheriff Shawn "Mickey" Stines say they will rely on a mental-health defense in the case accusing him of killing District Judge Kevin Mullins — but they are asking the court to prevent prosecutors from subjecting him to a second psychiatric evaluation.

Case Background

Stines, 44, was Letcher County sheriff on Sept. 19, 2024, when authorities say he walked into Judge Kevin Mullins' chambers and fatally shot him. Surveillance video from inside the judge's office appears to show the shooting, including images of Mullins scrambling to hide under his desk. Stines was arraigned on Oct. 1, 2024.

Mental-Health Filings and Evaluations

Defense lawyers filed a notice in February 2025 informing prosecutors they planned to offer mental-health evidence related to criminal responsibility. That notice authorized the Commonwealth to seek a court-ordered psychiatric examination. The Commonwealth appointed Dr. Tim Allen of the Kentucky Correctional Psychiatric Center (KCPC) to evaluate Stines; defense counsel says Stines complied with that ordered assessment. Dr. Allen's written report was sealed by the court, and Judge Christopher Cohron has denied multiple defense motions to unseal it.

Prosecutors later asked for a second examination by a different clinician; Judge Cohron approved a follow-up evaluation by Dr. George Parker of Indiana. The defense has filed a petition for a writ of prohibition asking the court to vacate that order and block the second exam.

Defense petition: "In its request for an additional evaluation, the Commonwealth did not identify any methodologic testing error, incomplete testing, or other deficiency in the KCPC examination, yet seeks to examine Mr. Stines a second time through Dr. George Parker of Indiana. There is no evidence, or even a suggestion, that there was anything deficient in the first examination methods, testing or any technical issues. The Commonwealth is simply dissatisfied with the opinion its chosen examiner produced. … Simply disagreeing with your own expert is not sufficient grounds to order further invasion of Stines' Fifth Amendment rights."

Legal Arguments

The defense argues that a second, court-ordered psychiatric exam would unduly intrude on Stines' Fifth Amendment protections. Under prevailing law, statements a defendant makes to court-ordered examiners generally cannot be introduced by prosecutors unless the defense itself introduces mental-health evidence at trial — but defense attorneys contend that a second exam still risks exposing defense strategy and represents an intrusive intrusion on Stines' rights.

Stines' lawyers say they are limiting mental-health claims to issues of criminal responsibility for the shooting; they maintain Stines remains competent to stand trial. As the petition notes, more than two years have passed since the alleged shooting, and Stines has not asserted incompetency to stand trial.

Behavior After The Shooting

Body-worn camera footage from officers who responded to the courthouse shows Stines acting erratically and expressing fear, including statements that he did not feel safe. The video reportedly shows him refusing to board an elevator and hesitating to use a stairwell; he sometimes responded to officers but would fall silent when the shooting was mentioned.

The second psychiatric examination is currently scheduled for Oct. 14. Stines' attorneys have asked Judge Cohron to block that exam while their petition is pending.

Court TV reported the original story.