编写人丰县华山初级中学.ppt

ALI test (continued) Excludes as mental disease or defect “abnormalities manifested only by repeated criminal or other antisocial conduct.” ALI test used by Federal courts and the majority of state jurisdictions until 1984. Later case law also excluded impairment due to voluntary intoxication. Criticism arose regarding the volitional prong, but most jurisdictions kept the test. ALI Test (continued) Mental disease or defect – in general, must be substantial – 60-90% of NGRI acquittees are diagnosed as psychotic There must be a link between the mental disease or defect and the crime. Must show that “but for” the mental illness, the criminal act would not have occurred. Just because a defendant is mentally ill, it does not mean that he/she is not responsible. Defendant must be able to appreciate the moral wrongfulness of the behavior – not just know it’s illegal. APA argued against the use of a volitional prong. The Hinckley Case: Facts of the case Hinckley was found NGRI under the volitional prong. That is, it was determined by the jury that although he knew his behavior was wrong/criminal, he could not stop himself from acting due to mental disease or defect. This was a controversial verdict. Many felt that there was evidence that Hinckley could have stopped himself from acting and chose not to. This went to the heart of the matter regarding the ongoing debate about “irresistible impulse” vs. an “impulse not resisted.” Insanity Defense Act (1984) Act of US Congress Followed the recommendations of the ABA and APA Eliminated the volitional prong in Federal courts Also shifted the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense. That is, the defendant would have to prove insanity by “clear and convincing evidence.” Applies only to Federal courts, but many states also made their insanity laws more conservative after the Hinckley decision. Some (e.g., Texas) use a strict McNaughton standard, and some are considering abolishing the insanity defense. The Insanity Def