HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wortzel, H. Articles by Metzner, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wortzel, H. Articles by Metzner, J.

Clark v. Arizona: Diminishing the Right of Mentally Ill Individuals to a Full and Fair Defense

Dr. Wortzel is Instructor/Fellow with VISN19 MIRECC, Denver Veterans Medical Center, Denver, CO. He is also Instructor/Fellow
Dr. Metzner is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO. Address correspondence to: Hal S. Wortzel, MD, CPH Room 2508, 4200 East 9th Avenue C268-25, Denver, CO 80262. E-mail: hal.wortzel{at}uchsc.edu

In Clark v. Arizona, the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with two main questions: Does Arizona’s insanity defense statute, with its abridged M’Naughten standard, violate the Fourteenth Amendment? And does Arizona case law, with its complete prohibition on the use of mental disease or defect evidence to combat required mens rea elements of a crime, violate due process? In a six–three decision, the Court answered both of these questions in the negative.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. L. Knoll IV and P. J. Resnick Insanity Defense Evaluations: Toward a Model for Evidence-Based Practice Brief. Treat. Crisis Interven., February 1, 2008; 8(1): 92 - 110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]