BURKS V. UNITED STATES
437 U.S. 1 (1978)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This is an appeal from a robbery conviction.
FACTS: Burks (D) was convicted for robbing a federally insured bank by use of a dangerous
weapon. D used insanity as his defense, providing expert witnesses to testify that his
mental illness at the time of the robbery made him incapable of conforming his conduct to
the requirements of the law. The government (P) rebutted this argument with two experts
claiming that D was not mentally ill. P also produced lay witnesses to attest to D's sanity.
D appealed, claiming that he was not criminally responsible. The Court of Appeals agreed
with D that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. It remanded the case to
the trial court, holding that P's evidence, even when viewed in the light most favorable to
P, did not effectively rebut D's proof with respect to insanity and criminal responsibility.
It gave the District Court the power to decide whether a directed verdict of acquittal
should be entered or a new trial ordered. D claimed that the Court of Appeals' holding was
nothing more or less than a decision that the District Court had erred by not granting his
motion for a judgment of acquittal. D claimed that it made no difference that the
determination of evidentiary insufficiency was made by a reviewing court since the double
jeopardy considerations are the same, regardless of which court decides that a judgment of
acquittal is in order. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment