Defenses Related to Lack of Criminal Capacity Flashcards
Infancy
Under the defense of infancy, a child under the age of 7 does not have the capacity to commit a crime, there is a rebuttable presumption that a child aged 7 to 14 does not have the capacity to commit a crime, and a child over the age of 14 has the same capacity to commit a crime that an adult has.
Unconsciousness
Under the defense of unconsciousness, a person who is unconscious, for instance, someone who is sleep walking, does not have the capacity to commit a crime.
Involuntary Intoxication
Under the defense of involuntary intoxication, if a person is unintentionally intoxicated on alcohol or drugs as a result of force, fraud, medical prescription, reasonable mistake, allergic reaction, or the like, then his or her actions are excused to the same extent as they would be if those actions were the result of a mental disorder.
Voluntary Intoxication
Under the defense of voluntary intoxication, a defendant who is intentionally intoxicated will be excused for his or her actions only if the intoxication has developed into a permanent mental disorder. However, voluntary intoxication may mitigate the degree or severity of the crime or charge if, due to the intoxication, the requisite criminal intent is lacking.
The M’Naghten Rule or The Right vs. Wrong Test of Insanity
Under the M’Naghten Rule, a defendant is entitled to the defense of insanity if he suffers from a mental disease of the mind and does not know what he is doing or does not know that what he is doing is wrong. Also, a defendant is entitled to the defense of insanity if he suffers from an insane delusion and if the notion embodied in the delusion and believed to be a fact would excuse the defendant had the notion been true.
Insane Delusion
An insane delusion is the product of a mental disorder in which the defendant has a false belief in something that would be incredible to others and that belief remains persistent despite proof to the contrary.
The Irresistible Impulse Test
Under the Irresistible Impulse Test, a defendant is entitled to the defense of insanity if, because of a mental disorder, he knows that he is doing wrong but cannot control his behavior.
The Substantial Capacity Test or Model Penal Code Test
Under the Substantial Capacity Test or Model Penal Code Test, a defendant is entitled to the defense of insanity if at the time of his conduct, as a result of a mental disease or defect, he lacks substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or the capacity to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.
The Durham Rule or Product Rule
Under the Durham Rule, also known as the Product Rule, a defendant is entitled to the defense of insanity if, because of a mental disease or defect, he committed an unlawful act.
The Diminished Capacity Test or Wells-Gorshen Rule
Under the Diminished Capacity Test, also known as the Wells-Gorshen Rule, evidence of mental infirmity not amounting to insanity is admissible and should be considered on questions of premeditation, deliberation, and malice, although diminished capacity is not a complete defense.
