美国law作业代写 精神状态

2020-03-26 02:37

一些州，如亚利桑那州，使用M'Naghten测试来确定被指控犯罪的人在犯罪发生时是否神智正常。亚利桑那州的一位精神病医生声称，克拉克的精神分裂症并没有使他不知道是非的区别。法官判处克拉克一级谋杀，这是由于他在枪击前后行为的能力证据，证实没有任何迹象表明他的精神分裂症扭曲了他对现实的看法，以及“故意或故意杀害正在执行任务的执法人员。”（梅茨纳）克拉克对此判决提出上诉，宣布亚利桑那州的精神病测试和莫特规则违反了正当程序，审判法庭拒绝将他的精神病证据应用于其对男性犯罪的认定。法院驳回了他在亚利桑那州立法机关的陈述，因为正当程序禁止亚利桑那州缩小其精神错乱测试范围，或排除精神疾病和因精神疾病丧失能力的证据，以反驳必要的犯罪意图的证据。最高法院确认了亚利桑那上诉法院的裁决，因为他没有在莫特关于禁止考虑精神病证据以否定所需犯罪意图的禁令中，找出正当程序违规行为。法官们开始通过解决正当程序的挑战来剖析M'Naghten测试。观察证据包括一位专家证人对“克拉克以某种方式思考的倾向和他的行为特征”的描述（梅茨纳）。精神病证据包括专业心理学家或精神病医生根据他们的部分检查意见出具的证词，声称克拉克患有精神病。能力证据是由同一位专家心理学家和精神病医生提出的，集中在精神状态的具体细节上，这一细节决定了精神正常和精神错乱之间的区别。肯尼迪大法官在开始陈述时说，法庭对亚利桑那州对埃里克·克拉克的指控是不正确的。他因无法收集有关男性死亡的证据而获释。这个案子揭露了克拉克因精神疾病而获得的特权。警察没有得到公正的审判。
美国law作业代写 精神状态
 Several states, such as Arizona, use the M’Naghten test to determine whether a person accused of a crime was sane at the time of its occurrence. A psychiatrist from the state of Arizona claimed that Clark’s schizophrenia did not keep him from knowing the difference of right from wrong. The judge sentenced Clark to first degree murder, resulting from the capacity evidence of his actions before and after the shooting, corroborating no signs of his schizophrenia distorting his perception of reality, and “intentionally or knowingly killing a law enforcement officer who is in the line of duty.” (Metzner) Clark appealed this verdict, announcing that Arizona’s insanity test and the Mott rule violated due process, and the trial court’s refusal to apply his mental illness evidence to its determination of mens rea. The court denied his statement of the Arizona Legislature because due process prohibited Arizona from narrowing its insanity test or from excluding evidence of mental illness and incapacity due to mental illness to rebut evidence of the requisite criminal intent.The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the Arizona Court of Appeals for failing to find a due process violation in Mott’s ban on considering mental illness evidence to negate the required criminal intent. The justices began dissecting the M’Naghten test by addressing the due process challenge. “The observational evidence included an expert witness’s account of “Clark’s tendency to think in a certain way and his behavioral characteristics” (Metzner). The mental disease evidence consisted of testimonies from professional psychologists or psychiatrists based on opinions from parts of their examinations stating that Clark suffered from a mental disease. The capacity evidence was claimed by the same expert psychologists and psychiatrists and concentrated on the specific details of the mental condition that makes the difference between sanity and insanity. Justice Kennedy opened his statement by saying the Court is incorrect for the holding Arizona has on Eric Clark. He was freed due to the incapacity to collect evidence regarding mens rea. This case disclosed the privilege Clark received based on his mental illness. There was no justice served for the police officer.

• 上一篇：美国law assignment代写:道德行为准则
• 下一篇：没有了