144k views
1 vote
Claude was high on cocaine when he viciously assaulted a stranger. Because he was not completely aware of his actions at the time, Claude pled insanity. Based on which ruling is his plea likely to be dismissed

User Reyhan
by
7.7k points

2 Answers

3 votes

Final answer:

Claude's plea of insanity is likely to be dismissed because being under the influence of a substance like cocaine does not meet the legal criteria for an insanity defense, which requires a significant and persistent mental disease or defect.

Step-by-step explanation:

The plea of insanity is likely to be dismissed in the case of Claude, who was high on cocaine at the time of assaulting a stranger because voluntary intoxication is generally not considered a valid basis for an insanity defense. Legal standards for insanity require that the defendant had a severe mental disease or defect at the time of the crime, which made them unable to understand the nature and quality of their act or to distinguish right from wrong. Being under the influence of drugs does not meet the criteria for a legal insanity defense because drug use is a conscious choice, and it does not equate to a long-term mental illness. Therefore, Claude's lacosk of awareness due to drug intoxication would not typically satisfy the legal requirements for an insanity plea.

Historical cases and legal precedents support the notion that insanity pleas are carefully scrutinized, and temporary insanity induced by voluntary substance abuse does not align with legal definitions of mental incapacity. Courts will often reject insanity defenses if the defendant's mental state can be attributed to voluntary intoxication rather than a persistent mental condition that impairs judgment.

User Kish
by
7.7k points
0 votes

Answer:

The M'Naghten Rule

Step-by-step explanation:

The M'Naghten Rule

The first famous legal test for insanity came in 1843, in the M'Naghten case. ... First, a defendant is deemed insane if they were incapable of knowing what they were doing at the time the committing the object offense. This conclusion comports with criminal law's fundamental conception of culpability.

User IneQuation
by
6.4k points