Opinion ID: 2071178
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Evidence of Garner's State of Mind Before the Crime and After Treatment and Medication

Text: Garner objected at trial and now challenges on appeal the admission of (1) a deposition by his ex-wife concerning prior domestic and alcohol abuse; (2) testimony by his son's mother that he feigned craziness to keep social security benefits, and (3) letters to family members written while he was in jail awaiting trial, expressing guilt and claiming insanity. His objections include remoteness in time, hearsay, character propensity, undue prejudice, and relevance. When the defense of insanity is raised, evidence which may otherwise be inadmissable may be admitted. Gregory v. State, 540 N.E.2d 585, 591 (Ind.1989). Once a defendant offers an insanity plea, all [relevant] evidence is deemed admissible. Even evidence which is otherwise incompetent or immaterial may be admitted to show the mental state of the defendant. Id. (quoting Wood v. State, 512 N.E.2d 1094, 1098 (Ind. 1987)). Evidence need only be relevant to the claim of insanity to be admissible. Anderson v. State, 615 N.E.2d 91 (Ind.1993). Relevant evidence is evidence having any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable. Ind.Evidence Rule 401. That Garner's previous relationship with his wife was marked with violence strengthens the State's proposition that the rage towards his father is less attributable to insanity. Allegations of faking craziness to claim benefits may establish a pattern that Garner feigns mental illness, thereby raising doubt about the sincerity of his insanity claim. The letters Garner wrote from jail discuss the onset of his alleged insanity and are therefore relevant to that issue. Because the evidence Garner contests does make his claim of insanity more or less probable, that evidence is relevant and was therefore properly admitted.