APPRECIATE AND CONFORM
THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE (ALI) RULE: "APPRECIATE AND CONFORM."
In United States v. Brawner,* some eighteen years after the Durham
case, the Durham mental disease test was succeeded by a modification
of the insanity defense that had earlier been propounded by the American
Law Institute. That rule is considerably more specific than the Durham rule,
and yet not so narrow as the M'Naghten rule. It states:
1. 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 law.
2. As used in the Article, the terms "mental disease or defect" do not include
an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise
antisocial conduct. (American Law Institute, 2009, p. 66)
In the Brawner case, the court tried to further narrow the meaning of
"mental disease." Citing an earlier case he wrote:
A mental disease or defect includes any abnormal condition of the mind which
substantially affects mental or emotional processes and substantially impairs behavior
controls.
The ALI rule as modified in the Brawner case, has been adopted by thirty
state courts and is the standard in all federal courts of appeal. Under that
standard, Calvin Ellery would, of course, be acquitted. Convinced that the
Masons were both plotting to take over the government and assassinate
him, Ellery clearly lacked "substantial capacity ... to appreciate the criminality
(wrongfulness) of his conduct." The verdict with regard to Victor
Weiner, the pigtail snipper, would depend on whether the court was willing
and able to assess the strength of Weiner's desire and, therefore, his ability
"to conform his conduct to the requirements of law."
The outcome of the case of Arthur Wolff, who murdered his mother because
she seemed in the way of his sexual schemes, depends wholly on how a
jury would interpret the word appreciate in the section of the ALI rule that
says ". . . he lacks substantial capacity ... to appreciate the criminality
(wrongfulness) of his conduct. ..." Wolf "knew" he did wrong in killing his
mother, for he confessed immediately at the police station.
* United States v. Brawner, 471 F. 2d 969 (D. C. Dir. 1972).
t McDonald v. United States, 312 F. 3d 847 (D. C. eire 1962).
Notes:
This rule, found in § 4.01 of the Code, says that a defendant is not responsible for criminal conduct where (s)he, as a result of mental disease or defect, did not possess a "substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law." Section 4.01 of the Code
Criminal Law : 48 Within rule that a person is not responsible for criminal conduct it at the time of such conduct as result of mental disease or defect he lacks 'substantial capacity to' appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to requirements of the law, the term "mental disease or defect."
Looking for treatment?
If you are ready to schedule a FREE Consultation...
I encourage you to access this website
for the treatment I recommend here:
http://www.TheLiberatorMethod.com/
In United States v. Brawner,* some eighteen years after the Durham
case, the Durham mental disease test was succeeded by a modification
of the insanity defense that had earlier been propounded by the American
Law Institute. That rule is considerably more specific than the Durham rule,
and yet not so narrow as the M'Naghten rule. It states:
1. 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 law.
2. As used in the Article, the terms "mental disease or defect" do not include
an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise
antisocial conduct. (American Law Institute, 2009, p. 66)
In the Brawner case, the court tried to further narrow the meaning of
"mental disease." Citing an earlier case he wrote:
A mental disease or defect includes any abnormal condition of the mind which
substantially affects mental or emotional processes and substantially impairs behavior
controls.
The ALI rule as modified in the Brawner case, has been adopted by thirty
state courts and is the standard in all federal courts of appeal. Under that
standard, Calvin Ellery would, of course, be acquitted. Convinced that the
Masons were both plotting to take over the government and assassinate
him, Ellery clearly lacked "substantial capacity ... to appreciate the criminality
(wrongfulness) of his conduct." The verdict with regard to Victor
Weiner, the pigtail snipper, would depend on whether the court was willing
and able to assess the strength of Weiner's desire and, therefore, his ability
"to conform his conduct to the requirements of law."
The outcome of the case of Arthur Wolff, who murdered his mother because
she seemed in the way of his sexual schemes, depends wholly on how a
jury would interpret the word appreciate in the section of the ALI rule that
says ". . . he lacks substantial capacity ... to appreciate the criminality
(wrongfulness) of his conduct. ..." Wolf "knew" he did wrong in killing his
mother, for he confessed immediately at the police station.
* United States v. Brawner, 471 F. 2d 969 (D. C. Dir. 1972).
t McDonald v. United States, 312 F. 3d 847 (D. C. eire 1962).
Notes:
This rule, found in § 4.01 of the Code, says that a defendant is not responsible for criminal conduct where (s)he, as a result of mental disease or defect, did not possess a "substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law." Section 4.01 of the Code
Criminal Law : 48 Within rule that a person is not responsible for criminal conduct it at the time of such conduct as result of mental disease or defect he lacks 'substantial capacity to' appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to requirements of the law, the term "mental disease or defect."
Looking for treatment?
If you are ready to schedule a FREE Consultation...
I encourage you to access this website
for the treatment I recommend here:
http://www.TheLiberatorMethod.com/