User:Tracymn/Insanity defense

I want to integrate cases into this article. I have first found People v. Carpenter, 464 Mich. 223. Defendant was not legally insane, but he was not mentally sound at the time of the crime.

Federal Law
State legislation is the primary form of legislation regarding insanity defenses. The governing federal legislation over the states include 18 USCS § 173 and USCS Fed Rules Crim Proc R 12.2. Anything beyond federal legislation is up to state discretion, leaving room for inconsistency between states. This is where the different tests established before are used. Each state has its own choice for what tests to be used.

18 USCS § 173
Federal legislation establishes that an insanity defense is an affirmative defense and that the burden of proof is on the defendant. Meaning that it is on the defense to prove insanity. This code explicitly states that voluntary use of drugs and alcohol cannot be used in determining diminished mental capacity because that was a choice within their control. Need for the two-pronged test is established. The first prong is to establish that at the time of the crime, the defendant was experiencing a serious mental disorder or disease. The second prong states that the defendant would not be able to appreciate the crime or the wrongfulness of his/her actions due to their diminished state. Other featured sections of the legislation include evidence, jury instructions, as well as appeal and review.

USCS Fed Crim Proc R 12.2
This rule establishes a need for notice on usage of an insanity defense. Meaning a defendant cannot show up to court and use an insanity defense without prior notification to the court. Per this rule, the court may request a mental examination on the defendant. Failure to disclose the use of an insanity defense can result in the court excluding expert testimony.