Delaware
How Durham v. United States applies in Delaware: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Criminal Law.
Delaware follows a hybrid approach incorporating elements from the Durham rule, emphasizing the relationship between mental illness and criminal liability. The state requires not only a nexus between the accused’s mental state and the crime but also considers the broader implications of mental health in assessing culpability.
Under Delaware law, a defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that, due to a mental illness or defect, they lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of their conduct or to conform their conduct to the law.
The court ruled that the defendant's mental illness impaired his ability to understand the nature of his actions, thus applying the modified Durham standard.
In this case, the court held that the prosecution must meet the burden of showing the defendant was aware of his criminal conduct despite his mental illness.
The court found that evidence of severe psychological issues can establish a defense under the diminished capacity standard.
Unlike the federal standard, which relies heavily on the Insanity Defense Reform Act focusing on 'not guilty by reason of insanity,' Delaware's standard requires a consideration of mental illness's effect on the defendant's understanding and control, thus providing a more nuanced view of culpability.
The principles from Durham and its adaptations in Delaware are frequently tested, particularly in relation to discussing the insanity defense and mental illness in criminal liability.