Perez v. Cain
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
529 F.3d 588 (2008)
Salvador Perez (defendant), fearing pursuit by drug dealers, fled with his son toward Florida, eventually shooting and killing a police officer who pursued him in New Orleans after a security guard called police. Seven psychiatric experts, all well-qualified and disinterested, testified at trial that Perez suffered serious mental illness, and six of them concluded that illness left him unable to distinguish right from wrong when he shot the officer; the State offered no rebuttal evidence, instead cross-examining Perez's wife about prior inconsistent statements suggesting Perez had shown no psychological problems before the incident. The jury convicted Perez of first-degree murder, state courts affirmed, and a federal district court on habeas review found insufficient evidence that Perez failed to prove insanity by a preponderance of the evidence; the State appealed.
Whether a jury may disregard the consistent findings of qualified, disinterested expert witnesses on a defendant's insanity without a valid, evidence-based reason for doing so.