Durham v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
214 F.2d 862 (1954)
Monte Durham (defendant) was tried for housebreaking and raised insanity as his only defense, presenting evidence of a long history of mental illness treatment and related past crimes, though some hospital records suggested he had recovered but retained a psychopathic personality. When the judge asked a medical expert whether Durham could distinguish right from wrong at the time of the offense, the expert testified that most mentally ill people can tell right from wrong, but that this fact doesn't determine whether Durham's illness actually drove his criminal conduct. The judge, applying the traditional right-wrong test, found Durham guilty, and Durham appealed.
Whether a defendant can be held criminally responsible for an offense that was the product of his mental disease or defect.