IDRA 1984
Definition
Insanity Defense Reform Act 1984: US federal legislation passed after John Hinckley's acquittal that eliminated the volitional prong, raised the standard to severe mental disease, and placed the burden of proof on the defendant by clear and convincing evidence.
- Full name
- Insanity Defense Reform Act 1984
- Jurisdiction
- United States, federal
- Trigger event
- John Hinckley's acquittal by reason of insanity
- Key change
- Eliminated the volitional (irresistible impulse) prong
- Burden of proof
- Shifted to defendant, clear and convincing evidence
Common questions
What was the volitional prong that IDRA 1984 eliminated?+
It was the part of some insanity tests, drawn from the Model Penal Code standard, that excused a defendant who understood right from wrong but could not control the impulse to act. IDRA 1984 removed this ground at the federal level, leaving only the cognitive prong of understanding the nature or wrongfulness of the act.
How did IDRA 1984 change who has to prove insanity?+
Before the Act, federal prosecutors generally had to disprove insanity once raised. IDRA 1984 shifted the burden onto the defendant, who must now prove insanity by clear and convincing evidence, a higher standard than the usual preponderance of the evidence used in most civil matters.
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...
- Durham Rule
- The 1954 US Court of Appeals (DC Circuit) product test: an accused is not criminally responsible if the unlawful act was the...
- 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...
- 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...