Society has stigmatized mental illness to such an extent that it has given a negative connotation to mentally disorder offenders (“MDOs”). Is not the point of prison rehabilitation? How can a person who is mentally ill and incapable of understanding what they’ve done stand a chance of recovery if they are looked down upon and labeled as a common criminal? Throughout the last sixty-five years, the judicial system has increasingly narrowed its acceptance of the defense of insanity when claimed by an MDO. This has caused rippling effects throughout society, from overpopulated prisons and repeat offenders to an increased fear of being labeled as mentally ill. Is there any chance of conquering this stigmatism for good and allowing those who are mentally ill to assert a successful claim affirmative defense of insanity?
The purpose of this research guide is to provide information to those in the legal profession concerning Florida's insanity defense in criminal law and its success rate compared to mental illnesses.
The defense of insanity assesses whether an individual who is not of sound mind is capable of the requisite intent, i.e. mens rea, necessary to commit a crime. This defense is an affirmative defense used in criminal cases. Insanity is an excuse defense rather than a justification defense. That is, it is a type of defense that exempts the defendant from liability because of a particular circumstance, but does not actually mitigate the result that occurred, at least in part, from the defendant's actions. In criminal law, an excuse defense is typically asserted when the Defendant is incapable of controlling his or her behaviors or impulses. There are four major tests which are used to determine insanity. These are the M'Naghten Test, the Irresistible Impulse Test, the Durham Rule, and the Model Penal Code Test.
In Florida, the courts have adopted the M'Naghten Test, which is the most widely utilized test for insanity in the United States. This test attempts to determine whether the accused individual knew the nature of the crime he or she is alleged to have committed, or understood right from wrong at the time it was committed. To prove insanity, the defense must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect at the time the crime was committed and, as result, either (1) did not know what he or she was doing or, (2) did not know it was wrong. Once the defendant establishes these elements, the burden shift back to the state to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant was not insane at the time he or she allegedly committed the crime.
All information provided by this guide is for instructional purposes only and should not be construed or considered to be legal advice. You should always consult an attorney to determine your legal rights.
