Notes and Questions (Kahler v. Kansas)

Linus Chan

1. Explain why Kahler deduced that KA has effectively abolished the insanity defense.

2. Explain the majority’s response to D’s assertion.

3. Explain the dissent’s argument.

4. The dissent offers a hypothetical involving two similar prosecutions for murder.

a. In Prosecution One, the accused person has shot and killed another person. The evidence at trial proves that, as a result of severe mental illness, he thought the victim was a dog.

b. Prosecution Two is similar but for one thing: The evidence at trial proves that, as a result of severe mental illness, the defendant thought that a dog ordered him to kill the victim. Under the insanity defense as traditionally understood, the government cannot convict either defendant.

Is the dissent correct that, under Kansas’ rule, it can convict the second but not the first?

5. In the wake of the Kahler v. Kansas decision, what must a profoundly mentally ill defendant in Kansas show in order to avoid conviction of a crime on the grounds of insanity?

This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.