Wisconsin
How Durham v. United States applies in Wisconsin: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Criminal Law.
Wisconsin's approach to insanity in criminal law incorporates the traditional M'Naghten rule rather than the broader 'substantial capacity' test from Durham. This means defendants must prove that they were unable to understand the nature of their actions or distinguish right from wrong at the time of the offense.
In Wisconsin, a defendant is not responsible for criminal conduct if, at the time of the conduct, the defendant was suffering from a mental disease or defect that caused them to lack substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct.
The court reaffirmed that the M'Naghten standard requires a clear demonstration of the defendant's mental state to establish insanity.
The court held that expert testimony regarding the defendant's mental state is crucial in insanity defenses under Wisconsin law.
The court ruled that the burden of proof for the insanity defense lies with the defendant, differing from the Durham decision's implications.
Wisconsin emphasizes the M'Naghten rule, which aligns more closely with the historical federal standard than the 'substantial capacity' approach taken in Durham. This reflects a more restrictive view on the legal insanity defense compared to broader federal interpretations.
Understanding the application of the M'Naghten rule in Wisconsin is critical for the Wisconsin bar exam, especially regarding insanity defenses.