NCJ Number
84435
Date Published
1982
Length
6 pages
Annotation
The Reagan Administration supports the formulation of the insanity defense proposed in Title VII of S. 2572, which permits a jury verdict of 'not guilty only by reason of insanity,' which could be returned only if the defendant, as a result of mental disease, lacked the state of mind required as an element of the offense.
Abstract
The proposal in S. 2572 would effectively eliminate the insanity defense except in those rare cases in which the defendant lacked the state of mind required as an element of the offense. Under this formulation, a mental disease or defect would be no defense if a defendant knew he was shooting at a human being to kill him, even if the defendant acted out of an irrational or insane belief. This would abolish the insanity defense to the maximum extent permitted under the Constitution and would make mental illness a factor to be considered at sentencing, just like any other mitigating factor. Less acceptable alternatives for modifying the insanity defense include (1) shifting to the defendant the burden of providing he/she was insane, (2) permitting the jury to return a verdict of 'guilty but insane,' and (3) permitting a special verdict of 'guilty but mentally ill.' The latter approach does not alter the requirement that the government prove every essential element of the offense, including the required state of mind. Such a verdict could be returned only if the mental illness does not negate the defendant's ability to understand the unlawful nature of his conduct and does not negate his ability to conform his actions to the law's requirements. This approach, however, would still lead to a battle of expert witnesses on issues as wide and varied as under present procedures. The other approaches would likely be found unconstitutional.