Court Opinion

ID: 9677179
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:45:27.718779+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:18:53.363043
License: Public Domain

VANCE, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. When a defendant in a criminal case relies upon the defense of insanity the burden of proof rests with him. The issue is not submissi-ble to the jury unless he presents evidence from which a jury can draw an inference that it is reasonably probable that he was insane when the crime was committed. This requires proof that it is more likely than not that he was insane. The testimony of a psychiatrist that it is more likely than not that he would have great difficulty in conforming his conduct to the requirements of law does not meet that standard. I do not find any other evidence that it was more likely than not that the appellant was insane at the time of the commission of the crime. Consequently, I do not feel that the trial judge erred by denying the requested instruction on insanity.
GANT, J., joins in this dissent.