Court Opinion

ID: 9461729
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 22:23:18.452553+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:37:14.214752
License: Public Domain

ELY, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
It seems to me that the record, considered as a whole, establishes, beyond question, that McGraw was legally insane at the time he eommited the alleged offense. All of the expert testimony, including that of the physician presented by the prosecution, leads, ineluctably, to that conclusion. In the light of the unrebutted expert testimony, the Government could not establish, and, in my opinion, can never establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellant was legally sane at the time of the robbery. Thus, I would respectfully suggest to the district judge that, upon remand, the indictment should be dismissed. See United States v. Howard, 432 F.2d 1188, 1191 (9th Cir. 1970) (majority concurring opinion). I would not anticipate that the Government, acting responsibly, would undertake, at this late time, to seek out another medical witness who might contradict the testimony of the three apparently reputable physicians who have already expressed the opinion that, under the test of Wade v. United States, cited in the majority opinion, McGraw was not sane when he committed the robbery.
With the addition of these comments, I concur in the careful analysis set forth by my Brother Wallace in the majority opinion.