Court Opinion

ID: 9663662
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:46:53.882358+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:54.650811
License: Public Domain

Gordon, J.
(dissenting in part). In preserving the M’Naghten rule as fashioned by this court in State v. Esser (1962), 16 Wis. (2d) 567, 115 N. W. (2d) 505, the majority opinion has my support. However, I must respectfully dissent from that portion of the court’s opinion which gives an option to a defendant to be tried under the American Law Institute definition of insanity.
*446I consider this to be a particularly undesirable manner of backing into the American Law Institute test. The Wisconsin legislature has fixed the burden of proof of insanity on the state by sec. 957.11 (1) and (2), Stats., and it is seriously ill-advised, in my view, for this court, by a bare majority, to upset that legislative direction with an “experiment” such as is outlined in the majority opinion.
In my opinion, the judgment below should be affirmed.
I am authorized to state that Mr. Justice Heffernan joins in this dissent.