{"id":13504,"date":"2018-02-09T19:18:19","date_gmt":"2018-02-09T19:18:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=13504"},"modified":"2018-02-09T19:18:19","modified_gmt":"2018-02-09T19:18:19","slug":"durham-test-holds-that-a-defendant-is-not-criminally-responsible-for-an-act-that-was-the-product-of-mental-disease-or-defect","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=13504","title":{"rendered":"Durham Test – holds that a defendant is not criminally responsible for an act that was the product of mental disease or defect"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This page is continued from Criminal Law Self-Help<\/a> >>>> Types of Pleas<\/em> and Pleadings<\/em><\/a> >>>> Types of Pleas (criminal law)<\/a> >>>> Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity<\/a> >>>> Insanity<\/a>:<\/span>
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

*********************<\/p>\n

Durham<\/em> rule<\/span>:<\/span>
\n<\/strong>(1954)<\/span><\/p>\n

1.<\/strong> Criminal law<\/em>. A test for the insanity defense, holding that a defendant is not criminally responsible for an act that was the product of mental disease or defect. (Durham v. U.S<\/em>., 214 F .2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954<\/span>)).\u00a0 *\u00a0 Formerly used in New Ha mpshire and the District of Columbia, the Durham rule has been criticized as being too broad and is no longer accepted in any American jurisdiction.<\/strong> \u2014 aka product test<\/strong><\/em><\/span>. [1]<\/span><\/p>\n

1.<\/strong> A test for establishing insanity for the purpose of a defense to criminal prosecution, in some jurisdictions.\u00a0 Under this test, a defendant’s criminal responsibility is determined on the bases of whether his unlawful act was the result or “product” of “mental disease or mental defect.”\u00a0 The Durham defense is similar to the irresistible impulse defense.<\/strong> [3]<\/span><\/p>\n

Durham Test<\/span> – A test of insanity constituting a defense in a criminal case, otherwise known as the “product test,” which determines criminal responsibility on whether the unlawful act was the product of “mental disease or mental defect.” 21 Am J2d Crim L \u00a7 39<\/span>.<\/strong><\/span>
\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 See mental disease<\/em> or mental defect<\/em>. [2]<\/span><\/p>\n

mental disease<\/span> – A disease affecting the mind.\u00a0 For the purposes of a Durham or product test in determining criminal responsibility, a condition which is considered capable of either improving or deteriorating. Durham v United State<\/em>s, 94 App DC 228, 214 F2d 862, 45 ALR2d 1430<\/span><\/strong>. [2]<\/span><\/p>\n

1. A disease affecting the mind.\u00a0 For purposes of the Durham rule of criminal responsibility, a condition that caused the criminal act for which the defendant is being tried.<\/strong> [3]<\/span><\/p>\n

mental defect<\/span> – a defect in the mind of a person.\u00a0 For the purposes of the Durham or product test of criminal responsibility, a condition which is not considered capable of either improving or deteriorating, and which may be either congenital, the result of injury, or the residual effect of a physical or mental disease. Durham v United States<\/em>, 94 App DC 228, 214 F2d 862, 45 ALR2d 1430<\/span>.<\/strong> [2]<\/span><\/p>\n

1. A defect in the mind of a person.\u00a0 For purposes of the Durham rule of criminal responsibility, a condition that caused the criminal act for which the defendant is being tried.<\/strong> [3]<\/span><\/p>\n

References:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Disclaimer:<\/span><\/span><\/strong> All material throughout this website is compiled in accordance with Fair Use<\/a>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

[1]: Black\u2019s Law Dictionary\u00a0Deluxe Tenth Edition\u00a0by Henry Campbell Black & Editor in Chief Bryan A. Garner<\/a>. ISBN: 978-0-314-62130-6<\/b><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

[2]: Ballantine\u2019s Law Dictionary\u00a0<\/a><\/b><\/span><\/strong>with Pronunciations
\n<\/b><\/span><\/em>Third Edition<\/b><\/span><\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>by James A. Ballantine\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/strong>(James Arthur 1871-1949).\u00a0\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/em>Edited by William S. Anderson.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a9 1969 by THE LAWYER\u2019S CO-OPERATIVE PUBLISHING COMPANY.\u00a0 Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 68-30931<\/b><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

[3]:\u00a0\u00a0Ballantine\u2019s Law Dictionary <\/a><\/b><\/span><\/strong>Legal Assistant Edition<\/b><\/span><\/a><\/em>
\nby Jack Ballantine\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/strong>(James Arthur 1871-1949).\u00a0\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/em>Doctored<\/b><\/span><\/a><\/strong>\u00a0<\/span><\/em>by\u00a0Jack G. Handler,\u00a0J.D.<\/a>\u00a0\u00a9 1994 Delmar by Thomson Learning.\u00a0 ISBN 0-8273-4874-6.<\/b><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

*******************************<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Back to Types of Pleas (criminal law)<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Back to<\/span><\/span><\/strong> Types of <\/a><\/span><\/strong>Pleas<\/span><\/em> and <\/span><\/strong>Pleadings<\/span><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

Back to <\/span><\/span><\/strong>Criminal Law Self-Help<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Home Page<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Like this website?<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Please Support Our Fundraiser<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

or donate via\u00a0PayPal<\/a>:<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n