-
Dec 17, 1581
1581
If a madman or a natural fool, or a lunatic in the time of his lunacy do [kill a man], this is no felonious act for they cannot be said to have any understanding will. -
M'Naughten Test
To address this, some states have modified the M'Naughten test with an "irresistible impulse" provision, which absolves a defendant who can distinguish right and wrong but is nonetheless unable to stop himself from committing an act he knows to be wrong. -
Durham vs. United States
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that a defendant could not be found criminally responsible "if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect -
American Law Institute
The A.L.I. formulation provides that a defendant will not be held criminally responsible if at the time of the behavior in question "as a result of a mental disease or defect, he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. -
Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984
In order to qualify, an insanity defendant must show that his mental disease or defect is "severe." The "volitional" prong of the test, which excused a defendant who lacked the capacity to control his behavior, was eliminated -
Abolished of the Stricter ALI
Three states abolished the rule--- Utah, Montanna, and Idaho -
Guilty but Mentally Ill
A sort of hybrid alternative to an acquittal by reason of insanity, a defendant who receives a GBMI verdict is still considered legally guilty of the crime in question, but since he is mentally ill, he is entitled to receive mental health treatment while institutionalized. If his symptoms remit, however, he is required to serve out the remainder of his sentence in a regular correctional facility, unlike a defendant who was acquitted by reason of insanity, who must be released if it is determined