Court Opinion

ID: 9712127
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:47:03.10991+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:10.188397
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. Although the majority correctly points out that some witnesses did testify that in their opinion appellant was sane at the time of his attack, their narrative testimony belies that conclusion and in fact supports the conclusion of the doctors who testified that in their opinion he did not have the ability to form intent. The witnesses who testified that, in their opinion, appellant was sane at the time of the attack, based their opinion on how calm he was and the absence of any provocation for the attack. Such demeanor does not support sanity but in fact supports the medical conclusion that his attack was unprovoked and was not the act of a sane but upset individual.
It is the opinion of this writer that the entire evidence in this case leads only to the conclusion that appellant proceeded in a wholly illogical manner which fully supports the expert testimony that he was unable to form the intent to commit the attack.
I would reverse the conviction.
DICKSON, J., concurs.