Durham v. United States, 214 F.2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954),[1] is a criminal case articulating what became known as the Durham rule for juries to find a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity: "an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect."[2][3]
It was to enable psychiatrists to "inform the jury of the character of [the defendant's mental disease" so that a jury could be "guided by wider horizons of knowledge concerning mental life"[4] so that juries could make determinations based on expert testimony about the disease.[5] It was patterned on State v. Pike.[6][5] It was adopted by only two states, for a short time but is still influential on debate over legal insanity.[5] The decision was criticized for leaving a jury with no standard to judge impairment of reason or control, for not defining mental disease, and for leaving the jury dependent on expert testimony.[5]
Referencesedit
^Durham v. United States, 214 F.2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954).
durham, united, states, 1954, this, article, needs, additional, citations, verification, please, help, improve, this, article, adding, citations, reliable, sources, unsourced, material, challenged, removed, find, sources, durham, united, states, 1954, news, ne. This article needs additional citations for verification Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources Unsourced material may be challenged and removed Find sources Durham v United States 1954 news newspapers books scholar JSTOR October 2016 Learn how and when to remove this message Durham v United States 214 F 2d 862 D C Cir 1954 1 is a criminal case articulating what became known as the Durham rule for juries to find a defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect 2 3 Durham v United StatesCourtUnited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia CircuitFull case nameMonte Durham v United StatesArguedMarch 19 1954DecidedJuly 1 1954Citation s 214 F 2d 862 94 U S App D C 228 45 A L R 2d 1430Case historySubsequent historyPetition for rehearing en banc denied September 10 1954Court membershipJudge s sittingHenry White Edgerton David L Bazelon George Thomas WashingtonCase opinionsMajorityBazelon joined by a unanimous courtKeywordsInsanity defense It was to enable psychiatrists to inform the jury of the character of the defendant s mental disease so that a jury could be guided by wider horizons of knowledge concerning mental life 4 so that juries could make determinations based on expert testimony about the disease 5 It was patterned on State v Pike 6 5 It was adopted by only two states for a short time but is still influential on debate over legal insanity 5 The decision was criticized for leaving a jury with no standard to judge impairment of reason or control for not defining mental disease and for leaving the jury dependent on expert testimony 5 References edit Durham v United States 214 F 2d 862 D C Cir 1954 Durham 214 F 2d at 874 75 Criminal Law Cases and Materials 7th ed 2012 Wolters Kluwer Law amp Business John Kaplan Robert Weisberg Guyora Binder ISBN 978 1 4548 0698 1 1 Durham 214 F 2d at 876 a b c d Insanity Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice 1983 Abraham Goldstein pp736 40 State v Pike 49 N H 399 1869 External links editText of Durham v United States 214 F 2d 862 D C Cir 1954 is available from CourtListener Google Scholar Justia nbsp This article relating to case law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Durham v United States 1954 amp oldid 1220714177, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
