Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
In 1983, Utah adopted a new statutory scheme for insanity. Its new statute held that insanity was a defense such that it can show that the defendant lacked the mental state required as an element of the offense charged but that otherwise, insanity is not a defense. This eliminated the prior law, which allowed the defendant to present an independent affirmative defense of insanity. Hererra (D) and Sweezy (D1) pled not guilty by reason of insanity and filed interlocutory appeals challenging the constitutionality of the new statute.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co