Opinion ID: 333140
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Proof of Sanity

Text: 6 Defendant insists that the prosecution failed to prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt. Although there was conflicting expert testimony and some lay testimony pointed to appellant's history of mental problems, 3 defendant's expert psychiatrist testified that the kind of disorder suffered by defendant was subject to periods of time when the accused could 'appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct and conform to the requirements of the law,' which satisfies this circuit's definition of sanity. See Blake v. United States, 407 F.2d 908, 916 (5th Cir. 1969) (en banc). Furthermore, both of the prosecution's experts testified, based on recorded conversations, that appellant was sane during the period in question and knew the difference between right and wrong. And significantly, there was testimony that around this time appellant had stated that selling cocaine was wrong. Taking the view most favorable to the government, we think that there is substantial evidence 4 of sanity at the time of the offense to support the verdict.