Which of the following best describes the standard under the MPC for determining whether a defendant may raise a mental disorder as an affirmative defense?
The defendant’s impaired judgment due to a mental condition excuses criminal liability.
The defendant lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of their actions or to conform their actions to the requirements of the law.
A mental disorder is a proper defense if it diminished the defendant’s ability to recall the events of the crime.
The defendant was unable to distinguish between right and wrong at the time of the offense.
The MPC provides that a defendant may assert a mental disorder defense if, as a result of a mental disease or defect, they lacked substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct or to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law. This standard is distinct from more restrictive tests, such as the M'Naghten Rule, which focuses solely on whether a defendant was unable to distinguish between right and wrong. Incorrect answers either misstate the criteria by narrowing it or incorrectly suggest mental impairments unrelated to legal responsibility, such as memory impairment, could suffice for a defense.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What does 'substantial capacity' mean under the MPC?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does the MPC's standard differ from the M'Naghten Rule?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Can a defendant's memory impairment serve as a basis for a mental disorder defense under the MPC?