enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. United States federal laws governing defendants with mental ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_laws...

    Per Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2, a defendant intending to pursue an insanity defense must timely notify an attorney for the government in writing. The government then has a right to have the court order a psychiatric or psychological examination.

  3. Durham rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durham_rule

    A Durham rule, product test, or product defect rule is a rule in a criminal case by which a jury may determine a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity because a criminal act was the product of a mental disease. Examples in which such rules were articulated in common law include State v. Pike (1870) and Durham v

  4. M'Naghten rules - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M'Naghten_rules

    The House of Lords delivered the following exposition of the rules: . the jurors ought to be told in all cases that every man is to be presumed to be sane, and to possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes, until the contrary be proved to their satisfaction; and that to establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the ...

  5. Insanity defense - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense

    Over its decades of use the definition of insanity has been modified by statute, with changes to the availability of the insanity defense, what constitutes legal insanity, whether the prosecutor or defendant has the burden of proof, the standard of proof required at trial, trial procedures, and to commitment and release procedures for ...

  6. Kahler v. Kansas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kahler_v._Kansas

    Kahler v. Kansas, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), is a case of the United States Supreme Court in which the justices ruled that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution do not require that states adopt the insanity defense in criminal cases that are based on the defendant's ability to recognize right from wrong.

  7. Durham v. United States (1954) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durham_v._United_States_(1954)

    Durham v. United States, 214 F.2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954), [1] is a criminal case articulating what became known as the Durham rule for juries to find a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity: "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect."

  8. ALI rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALI_rule

    The ALI rule, or American Law Institute Model Penal Code rule, is a recommended rule for instructing juries how to find a defendant in a criminal trial is not guilty by reason of insanity.

  9. Irresistible impulse - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irresistible_impulse

    "Irresistible impulse" can be pleaded only under the defense of diminished responsibility, not under the defense of insanity. Thus it operates only as a partial defence to murder, reducing the charge to manslaughter, and giving the judge discretion as to length of sentence and whether committal would be more appropriate than incarceration.