Brief Fact Summary. The Defendant was convicted of robbery after his defense of insanity was rejected. He appeals the conviction on the ground that the definition of insanity is outdated and prejudicial.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has adopted the Model Penal Code test for insanity, which states “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality (wrongfulness) of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.”
Damages for lost earnings must be shown with reasonable certainty; compensatory awards based upon speculation and conjecture will not be allowed.
View Full Point of LawIssue. Was the district court’s jury instruction on insanity outdated and prejudicial?
Held. Yes. Under the case of Davis v. United States, 165 U.S. 373 (1897), the insanity charge to the jury was: “The term ‘insanity’ as used in this defense means such a perverted and deranged condition of the mental and moral faculties as to render a person incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong, or unconscious at the time of the nature of the act he is committing, or where, though conscious of it and able to distinguish between right and wrong and know the act is wrong, yet his will, by which I mean the governing power of his mind, has been otherwise than voluntarily so completely destroyed that his actions are not subject to it, but are beyond his control.” By contrast, the Model Penal Code test for insanity, which the Defendant urged the court to adopt, states, “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality (wrongfulness) of his
conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.” The latter definition is slightly less rigid in that the lack of capacity must be “substantial” rather than complete. This is the better formula, according to the court. Hence, the conviction was overturned and the case remanded for a new trial.
Discussion. Following the trend among the United States Circuit Courts of Appeal, the Fifth Circuit adopted the Model Penal Code test for insanity, which essentially says that a person is insane if he does not know right from wrong or is unable to control his conduct to conform with the law.