Durham Rule
Definition
The 1954 US Court of Appeals (DC Circuit) product test: an accused is not criminally responsible if the unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect. Retired in 1972 in US v. Brawner.
- Established
- 1954, US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit
- Test
- Unlawful act was the product of mental disease or defect
- Retired
- 1972, in US v. Brawner
- Jurisdiction
- United States
Common questions
Why was the Durham rule eventually abandoned?+
Courts found the product test too broad and difficult to apply consistently, since almost any act could be argued as a product of some mental condition, giving psychiatric witnesses excessive influence over what was ultimately a legal, not medical, determination of responsibility.
How does the Durham rule differ from the M'Naghten test it was meant to improve on?+
M'Naghten asks narrowly whether the accused knew the nature of the act or that it was wrong, while Durham asked more broadly whether the act was a product of mental disease, without requiring a specific cognitive impairment, which is what made it harder to apply predictably in court.
Related terms
- Appreciation vs Knowledge
- The MPC and Canadian Criminal Code use 'appreciate' rather than 'know,' requiring a deeper, emotionally integrated understanding of the nature or wrongfulness...
- BNS § 22
- India's insanity defence provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, replacing IPC § 84: an act is not an offence if done...
- Guilty but Mentally Ill (GBMI)
- A US verdict alternative introduced in some states from 1975: the defendant is found guilty (and sentenced) but is entitled to psychiatric...
- Hari Singh Gond (2008)
- Indian Supreme Court ruling setting out the four elements for establishing the IPC § 84 (now BNS § 22) defence: mental illness...
- IDRA 1984
- Insanity Defense Reform Act 1984: US federal legislation passed after John Hinckley's acquittal that eliminated the volitional prong, raised the standard to...
- M'Naghten Rules
- The 1843 English House of Lords formulation providing that a defendant is not criminally responsible if, at the time of the offence,...
- MPC § 4.01 Substantial-Capacity Test
- The American Law Institute's 1962 insanity formulation: a person lacks criminal responsibility if, as a result of mental disease or defect, they...