Legal Opinion · Concurrence
Goudy v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided February 25, 1986No. 83-1357PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Concurrence
NEBEKER, Associate Judge, with whom Associate Judge TERRY
concurs:
Appellant Goudy complains in his rehearing petition (before the division and for en banc treatment) that the court’s opinion has deprived him of
his right ... to waive his insanity defense to the misdemeanor offense of simple assault, after the division has modified the judgment [of the trial court] from not guilty of rape by reason of insanity to not guilty of the lesser included offense of simple assault by reason of insanity.
He relies on Frendak v. United States, 408 A.2d 364 (D.C.1979), for his conclusion that he has a right…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Frendak v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Goudy v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
3Cited by3 opinions
- Mungo v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- In re A.B.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- Matter of ABDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989