Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Dube (D) was charged with robbing a federally insured bank. D introduced testimony of a psychiatrist and psychologist, both claiming that D was insane at the time of the robbery. These diagnoses were made five months after the robbery. They were based mostly on a narrative history supplied by D. The prosecution did not introduce expert opinion testimony. It instead relied on cross-examination and lay testimony of bank tellers and D's accomplice. D was convicted. He appealed, claiming that the prosecution did not sustain its burden of proving D's sanity beyond a reasonable doubt.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co