United States v. Burns
United States Court of Military Appeals
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
- People v. JordanIllinois Supreme Court · 1922
- Alaniz v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1944
- Turner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1946
- Wynn v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909