How the Insanity Defense Works in Miami Homicide Cases

Television and film portrayals of the criminal justice system often like to use the insanity defense as a dramatic storytelling device. In the real world, however, insanity defenses are rarely used and often carry significant consequences even when a defendant is found not guilty of the underlying crime. Indeed, a successful insanity defense often leads to a lengthy period of involuntary civil commitment.

As a matter of law, a criminal defendant is presumed to be “sane.” Insanity is therefore what is considered an affirmative defense in Florida. This means the burden is on the defendant to prove that they suffer from some “mental infirmity, disease, or defect” based on a “preponderance of the evidence.” Additionally, the defense must show that the defendant’s mental condition prevented them from understanding the consequences of their actions, i.e., they were incapable of distinguishing right from wrong when they committed the alleged crime.

Florida Man Committed After Acquittal in Wife’s Murder

Here is a practical illustration of what happens when a defendant successfully pleads insanity. In this case, Reynolds v. State, a grand jury indicted the defendant for murder of his wife. The defendant acknowledged that he shot and killed his wife but offered an affirmative defense of insanity. The jury ultimately returned a verdict of “not guilty by reason of insanity.”

That was not the end of the matter. The trial court then held a civil commitment hearing, which is required by Florida law. The state and the defense each called an expert witness to testify as to the defendant’s mental condition. Both witnesses agreed the defendant suffered from a mental illness. They also concurred that while the defendant was presently “stable,” that was primarily due to the fact he was under supervision–he was in jail pending trial–and taking his medication. The defense’s expert added that he had concerns that the defendant “may become stabilized” and pose a “risk for harm to self or others” if he was no longer supervised.

Based on this evidence, the judge ordered the defendant’s involuntary commitment to the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF). The defendant then filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the Fifth District Court of Appeals, challenging the legality of the commitment order. But the appellate court agreed with the trial judge’s decision. The Fifth District said the expert testimony provided “competent substantial evidence” that the defendant’s ongoing mental illness made him “manifestly dangerous to himself or others.” So the defendant will remain under DCF custody until such time as he no longer poses such a danger.

Contact a Miami Homicide Attorney Today

If you are accused of murder or manslaughter, the facts of your case may justify one or more affirmative defenses. A qualified Miami homicide attorney can advise you on the potential risks and benefits of such defenses and ensure you present the strongest possible case to a judge and jury. Call AsiliA Law Firm today at 786-420-3014 or contact us online to schedule an initial consultation.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10434179640050372041