Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Burns

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided April 29, 1955No. 847Published

1ConcurrenceLatimer, Judge

I concur.

Because I prefer to base my decision on a legal concept which is not mentioned in the majority opinion, I file this concurring opinion.

In order to decide whether instructions concerning the accused’s mental capacity to entertain a specific intent were required, it is necessary to determine the manner in which his ir-restible impulse affected his responsibility for the crime of robbery. For the purposes of ascertaining whether the issue of a mental deficiency not amounting to legal insanity was raised reasonably, we must accept the testimony that the assault committed by the accused…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. JordanIllinois Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Alaniz v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1944
  3. Turner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1946
  4. Wynn v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API