leland
oregon
argued
january
decided
june
criminal
prosecution
oregon
state
indictment
murder
first
degree
appellant
pleaded
guilty
gave
notice
intention
prove
insanity
oregon
statutes
required
prove
insanity
beyond
reasonable
doubt
made
morbid
propensity
defense
appellant
found
guilty
jury
sentenced
death
held
statutes
deprive
appellant
life
liberty
without
due
process
law
violation
fourteenth
amendment
federal
constitution
pp
trial
judge
instructions
jury
charge
whole
made
clear
burden
upon
state
prove
necessary
elements
guilt
lesser
degrees
homicide
well
offense
charged
indictment
pp
rule
announced
davis
accused
entitled
acquittal
specific
crime
charged
upon
evidence
reasonable
doubt
whether
capable
law
committing
crime
established
constitutional
doctrine
rule
followed
federal
courts
oregon
rule
requiring
accused
plea
insanity
establish
defense
beyond
reasonable
doubt
rule
effect
twenty
places
burden
accused
establish
insanity
preponderance
evidence
similar
measure
persuasion
difference
magnitude
significant
determining
constitutional
question
presented
practice
followed
large
number
conclusive
whether
accords
due
process
may
considered
determining
whether
offends
principle
justice
rooted
traditions
conscience
people
ranked
fundamental
instant
case
one
sought
enforce
state
right
held
secured
defendants
federal
courts
bill
rights
pp
oregon
policy
respect
burden
proof
issue
sanity
said
violate
generally
accepted
concepts
basic
standards
justice
tot
require
different
conclusion
reached
contention
instructions
jury
case
may
confused
jury
distinction
state
burden
proving
premeditation
elements
crime
charged
appellant
burden
proving
insanity
sustained
due
process
violated
oregon
statute
provides
morbid
propensity
commit
prohibited
acts
existing
mind
person
shown
incapable
knowing
wrongfulness
acts
forms
defense
prosecution
therefor
pp
irresistible
impulse
test
legal
sanity
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
due
process
require
state
adopt
test
rather
right
wrong
test
pp
trial
refusal
require
district
attorney
make
one
appellant
confessions
available
counsel
trial
deny
due
process
circumstances
case
pp
appellant
conviction
murder
challenged
denying
due
process
violation
fourteenth
amendment
affirmed
state
appeal
affirmed
thomas
ryan
argued
cause
appellant
brief
harold
davidson
raymond
carskadon
charles
eugene
raymond
argued
cause
appellee
brief
george
neuner
attorney
general
oregon
justice
clark
delivered
opinion
appellant
charged
murder
first
degree
pleaded
guilty
gave
notice
intention
prove
insanity
upon
trial
circuit
multnomah
county
oregon
found
guilty
jury
accordance
jury
decision
recommend
life
imprisonment
appellant
received
sentence
death
oregon
affirmed
case
appeal
oregon
statutes
required
appellant
prove
insanity
beyond
reasonable
doubt
made
morbid
propensity
defense
principal
questions
appeal
raised
appellant
contentions
statutes
deprive
life
liberty
without
due
process
law
guaranteed
fourteenth
amendment
facts
crime
revealed
appellant
confessions
corroborated
evidence
killed
girl
striking
head
several
times
steel
bar
stabbing
twice
hunting
knife
upon
arrested
five
days
later
theft
automobile
asked
talk
homicide
officer
voluntarily
confessed
murder
directed
police
scene
crime
pointed
location
body
day
signed
full
confession
request
made
another
handwriting
indictment
counsel
appointed
represent
done
diligence
carrying
case
three
courts
one
oregon
statutes
question
provides
commission
act
charged
crime
proven
defense
sought
established
insanity
defendant
must
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
conformity
applicable
state
law
trial
judge
instructed
jury
although
appellant
charged
murder
first
degree
might
determine
committed
lesser
crime
included
charged
instructed
plea
guilty
put
issue
every
material
necessary
element
lesser
degrees
homicide
well
offense
charged
indictment
jury
returned
five
verdicts
guilty
murder
first
degree
found
beyond
reasonable
doubt
appellant
killing
purposely
deliberate
premeditated
malice
guilty
murder
second
degree
found
beyond
reasonable
doubt
appellant
killing
purposely
maliciously
without
deliberation
premeditation
guilty
manslaughter
found
beyond
reasonable
doubt
appellant
killing
without
malice
deliberation
upon
sudden
heat
passion
caused
provocation
apparently
sufficient
make
passion
irresistible
guilty
careful
consideration
evidence
remained
minds
reasonable
doubt
existence
necessary
elements
degree
homicide
guilty
reason
insanity
found
beyond
reasonable
doubt
appellant
insane
time
offense
charged
finding
insanity
freed
appellant
responsibility
possible
offenses
verdict
jury
determined
guilty
first
degree
murder
required
agreement
twelve
jurors
verdict
guilty
reason
insanity
required
concurrence
ten
members
panel
apparent
jury
might
found
appellant
mentally
incapable
premeditation
deliberation
required
support
first
degree
murder
verdict
intent
necessary
find
guilty
either
first
second
degree
murder
yet
found
legally
insane
although
plea
insanity
made
prosecution
required
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
every
element
crime
charged
including
case
first
degree
murder
premeditation
deliberation
malice
intent
trial
repeatedly
emphasized
requirement
charge
jury
moreover
judge
directed
jury
follows
instruct
evidence
adduced
trial
prove
defendant
insanity
shall
considered
weighed
evidence
whether
find
defendant
insane
regard
ability
defendant
premeditate
form
purpose
deliberate
act
wilfully
act
maliciously
find
defendant
lacking
ability
defendant
committed
crime
murder
first
degree
instruct
find
defendant
mental
condition
affected
diseased
end
defendant
formulate
plan
design
intent
kill
cool
blood
defendant
committed
crime
murder
first
degree
statute
originally
enacted
oregon
adopted
prevailing
doctrine
time
since
men
sane
defendant
must
prove
insanity
avoid
responsibility
acts
rule
announced
leading
english
decision
case
jurors
told
cases
every
man
presumed
sane
possess
sufficient
degree
reason
responsible
crimes
contrary
proved
satisfaction
establish
defence
ground
insanity
must
clearly
proved
time
committing
act
party
accused
laboring
defect
reason
disease
mind
know
nature
quality
act
views
expressed
supported
many
adjudications
entitled
high
respect
fact
might
felt
obliged
accept
general
doctrine
announced
cases
desirable
uniformity
rule
administration
criminal
law
governments
whose
constitutions
equally
recognize
fundamental
principles
deemed
essential
protection
life
liberty
today
oregon
state
requires
accused
plea
insanity
establish
defense
beyond
reasonable
doubt
twenty
however
place
burden
accused
establish
insanity
preponderance
evidence
similar
measure
persuasion
evident
distinction
two
rules
quantum
proof
required
see
practical
difference
magnitude
significant
determining
constitutional
question
face
oregon
merely
requires
heavier
burden
proof
instance
order
establish
insanity
complete
defense
charges
preferred
accused
must
prove
insanity
fact
practice
followed
large
number
conclusive
decision
whether
practice
accords
due
process
plainly
worth
considering
determining
whether
practice
offends
principle
justice
rooted
traditions
conscience
people
ranked
fundamental
snyder
massachusetts
case
sought
enforce
right
held
secured
defendants
federal
courts
bill
rights
davis
supra
adopted
rule
procedure
federal
courts
contrary
oregon
ts
procedure
run
foul
fourteenth
amendment
another
method
may
seem
thinking
fairer
wiser
give
surer
promise
protection
prisoner
bar
snyder
massachusetts
supra
judicial
judgment
applying
due
process
clause
must
move
within
limits
accepted
notions
justice
based
upon
idiosyncrasies
merely
personal
judgment
important
safeguard
merely
individual
judgment
alert
deference
judgment
state
review
justice
frankfurter
concurring
malinski
new
york
therefore
reluctant
interfere
oregon
determination
policy
respect
burden
proof
issue
sanity
since
say
policy
violates
generally
accepted
concepts
basic
standards
justice
nothing
said
tot
suggests
different
conclusion
decision
struck
specific
presumption
created
congressional
enactment
found
fact
thus
required
presumed
rational
connection
fact
proven
set
presumption
operation
statute
resulted
presumption
guilt
based
upon
proof
fact
neither
criminal
element
crime
charged
seen
oregon
required
prosecutor
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
every
element
offense
charged
issue
insanity
absolute
bar
charge
burden
placed
upon
appellant
courts
accused
obliged
introduce
proof
overcome
presumption
sanity
contended
instructions
may
confused
jury
distinction
state
burden
proving
premeditation
elements
charge
appellant
burden
proving
insanity
think
charge
jury
clear
instructions
juries
ordinarily
reasonably
respect
state
burden
proof
upon
elements
crime
charge
particularly
emphatic
juries
centuries
made
basic
decisions
guilt
innocence
criminal
responsibility
legal
insanity
upon
basis
facts
revealed
evidence
law
explained
instructions
detailing
legal
distinctions
placement
weight
burden
proof
effect
presumptions
meaning
intent
etc
think
condemn
operation
system
condemn
system
generally
prepared
much
said
applies
also
appellant
contention
due
process
violated
oregon
statute
providing
morbid
propensity
commit
prohibited
acts
existing
mind
person
shown
incapable
knowing
wrongfulness
acts
forms
defense
prosecution
therefor
statute
amounts
legislative
adoption
right
wrong
test
legal
insanity
preference
irresistible
impulse
test
knowledge
right
wrong
exclusive
test
criminal
responsibility
majority
american
jurisdictions
science
psychiatry
made
tremendous
strides
since
test
laid
case
progress
science
reached
point
learning
compel
us
require
eliminate
right
wrong
test
criminal
law
moreover
choice
test
legal
sanity
involves
scientific
knowledge
questions
basic
policy
extent
knowledge
determine
criminal
responsibility
whole
problem
evoked
wide
disagreement
among
studied
circumstances
clear
adoption
irresistible
impulse
test
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
appellant
also
contends
trial
refusal
require
district
attorney
make
one
appellant
confessions
available
counsel
trial
contrary
due
process
think
substance
argument
conclusion
buttressed
absence
assignment
error
ground
appellant
motion
new
trial
compare
avery
alabama
may
better
practice
prosecution
thus
exhibit
confession
failure
case
way
denied
appellant
fair
trial
record
shows
confession
produced
five
days
appellant
rested
case
ample
time
counsel
expert
witnesses
study
confession
addition
trial
judge
offered
time
purpose
refused
indication
record
appellant
prejudiced
inability
counsel
acquire
earlier
access
confession
affirmed
footnotes
six
possible
verdicts
listed
instructions
guilty
murder
first
degree
divided
two
verdicts
without
recommendation
life
imprisonment
penalty
since
jury
case
recommend
punishment
death
sentence
automatically
invoked
oregon
law
agreement
ten
jurors
also
sufficient
verdict
guilty
verdict
guilty
second
degree
murder
verdict
guilty
manslaughter
comp
laws
cf
state
butchek
instruct
constitute
murder
first
degree
necessary
state
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
moral
certainty
defendant
design
plan
take
life
formed
matured
cool
blood
hastily
upon
occasion
instruct
determining
whether
defendant
acted
purposely
premeditated
deliberated
malice
duty
take
consideration
defendant
mental
condition
factors
relating
thereto
even
though
may
find
legally
insane
fact
mentality
impaired
evidence
bears
upon
factors
duty
consider
evidence
along
evidence
case
comp
laws
requiring
notice
purpose
show
insanity
defense
providing
verdict
guilty
reason
insanity
consequent
commitment
asylum
judge
defining
legal
insanity
trial
instructed
jury
case
evidence
introduced
relating
mental
capacity
condition
defendant
time
girl
alleged
killed
satisfied
beyond
reasonable
doubt
defendant
killed
manner
alleged
indictment
within
lesser
degrees
included
therein
consider
mental
capacity
defendant
time
homicide
alleged
committed
emphasis
supplied
deady
laws
code
crim
cl
fin
stephen
digest
criminal
law
sturge
cf
sodeman
king
see
woolmington
director
public
prosecutions
weihofen
insanity
defense
criminal
law
clear
proof
sometimes
interpreted
mean
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
state
de
rance
la
ann
sometimes
mean
proof
preponderance
evidence
hurst
state
tex
cr
see
wharton
criminal
evidence
ed
see
hotema
matheson
weihofen
lists
twelve
requiring
proof
preponderance
evidence
four
requiring
proof
satisfaction
jury
two
combine
formulae
one
statute
defense
must
clearly
proved
reasonable
satisfaction
jury
one
held
jury
must
believe
defendant
insane
one
quantum
proof
stated
last
resort
appears
follow
preponderance
rule
weihofen
insanity
defense
criminal
law
including
oregon
mentioned
holding
accused
burden
proving
insanity
least
preponderance
evidence
wigmore
evidence
ed
supp
weihofen
insanity
defense
criminal
law
wigmore
evidence
ed
comp
laws
state
garver
state
wallace
state
hassing
weihofen
insanity
defense
criminal
law
cl
fin
compare
fisher
see
holloway
app
glueck
mental
disorder
criminal
law
hall
mental
disease
criminal
responsibility
rev
keedy
insanity
criminal
responsibility
harv
rev
palko
connecticut
justice
frankfurter
joined
justice
black
dissenting
however
much
conditions
may
improved
since
william
later
chief
justice
taft
expressed
disturbing
conviction
administration
criminal
law
union
may
one
two
exceptions
disgrace
civilization
taft
administration
criminal
law
yale
informed
person
unhappy
serious
defects
american
criminal
justice
unthinkable
failure
bring
guilty
book
heinous
crime
deeply
stirs
popular
sentiment
may
lead
legislature
state
one
emotional
storms
occasion
sweep
people
enact
thereafter
indictment
murder
following
attempted
rape
presumptive
proof
guilt
cast
upon
defendant
burden
proving
beyond
reasonable
doubt
killing
doubt
statute
go
beyond
freedom
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
fashion
penal
codes
procedures
enforcing
time
law
inherited
emerged
dark
barbaric
times
conception
justice
dominated
criminal
law
refused
put
accused
hazard
punishment
fails
remove
every
reasonable
doubt
innocence
minds
jurors
duty
government
establish
guilt
beyond
reasonable
doubt
notion
basic
law
rightly
one
boasts
free
society
requirement
safeguard
due
process
law
historic
procedural
content
due
process
accordingly
doubt
repeat
state
cast
upon
accused
duty
establishing
beyond
reasonable
doubt
act
caused
death
another
muscular
contraction
resulting
homicide
constitute
murder
even
though
person
immediate
occasion
another
death
deodand
forfeited
like
thing
medieval
law
behind
muscular
contraction
resulting
another
death
must
culpability
turn
homicide
murder
tests
culpability
may
determined
varying
conflicting
one
echo
scepticism
uttered
brain
fifteenth
century
devil
knoweth
mind
men
appreciate
vast
darkness
still
envelopes
man
understanding
man
mind
sanity
insanity
concepts
incertitude
given
varying
conflicting
content
time
time
time
specialists
field
naturally
always
conflict
psychological
views
absorbed
law
contradictory
views
students
mental
health
particular
time
stage
scientific
knowledge
indefensible
impose
upon
due
process
law
must
accord
depriving
person
life
liberty
one
test
rather
another
determining
criminal
culpability
thereby
displace
state
choice
test
matter
backward
may
light
best
scientific
canons
inevitably
legal
tests
determining
mental
state
criminal
culpability
based
strong
conflict
state
chosen
theory
testing
culpability
deprivation
life
without
due
process
send
man
doom
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
physical
events
homicide
constitute
murder
state
theory
incapable
acting
culpably
preclude
utilizing
common
sense
regarding
mental
irresponsibility
acts
resulting
homicide
taking
granted
men
sane
responsible
acts
man
act
devoid
mental
state
begets
culpability
exceptional
situation
law
right
devise
exceptional
procedure
regarding
accordingly
may
provide
various
ways
dealing
exceptional
situation
requiring
instance
defense
insanity
specially
pleaded
whose
behalf
claim
insanity
made
burden
showing
enough
overcome
assumption
presumption
normally
man
knows
therefore
responsible
issue
separately
tried
standing
disinterested
expert
agency
advise
jury
devices
used
combination
laws
present
greatest
diversity
relieving
prosecution
proving
affirmatively
man
sane
way
must
prove
affirmatively
defendant
man
pulled
trigger
struck
blow
legislation
makes
inroad
upon
basic
principle
state
must
prove
guilt
defendant
innocence
prove
satisfaction
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
unrecorded
reason
oregon
one
made
inroads
upon
principle
requiring
accused
prove
beyond
reasonable
doubt
absence
one
essential
elements
commission
murder
namely
culpability
muscular
contraction
like
every
state
oregon
presupposes
insane
person
made
pay
life
homicide
though
public
good
may
course
put
beyond
harm
unlike
every
state
however
oregon
says
accused
person
must
satisfy
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
incapable
committing
murder
committed
murder
law
oregon
since
year
code
criminal
procedure
defined
murder
conventional
way
also
provided
commission
act
charged
crime
proven
defence
sought
established
insanity
defendant
must
proven
beyond
reasonable
doubt
general
laws
oregon
et
latter
section
various
revisions
law
oregon
today
applied
conviction
review
whatever
tentative
intermediate
steps
experience
makes
permissible
aiding
state
establishing
ultimate
issues
prosecution
crime
state
relieved
final
proving
accusation
prove
accusation
must
prove
items
combination
constitute
offense
must
make
proof
beyond
reasonable
doubt
duty
state
establishing
every
fact
equation
adds
crime
establishing
satisfaction
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
decisive
difference
criminal
culpability
civil
liability
exception
limited
class
cases
variously
characterized
mala
prohibita
public
torts
enforcement
regulatory
measures
see
dotterweich
morissette
murder
malum
prohibitum
public
tort
object
regulatory
legislation
suggest
legal
oddity
oregon
imposes
upon
accused
burden
proving
beyond
reasonable
doubt
mind
capable
committing
murder
mere
difference
measure
proof
obliterate
distinction
civil
criminal
law
suggested
jury
charged
merely
conformity
requirement
oregon
law
also
various
general
terms
duty
state
prove
every
element
crime
charged
beyond
reasonable
doubt
including
case
first
degree
murder
premeditation
deliberation
malice
intent
short
matter
oregon
sustained
conviction
ground
oregon
statute
casts
upon
defendant
burden
proving
defense
insanity
beyond
reasonable
doubt
state
leland
suggest
suggested
state
although
jury
compelled
act
upon
requirement
statute
offend
due
process
clause
trial
judge
also
indulged
farrago
generalities
jury
premeditation
deliberation
malice
intent
exact
gifts
subtlety
even
judges
let
alone
juries
possess
see
international
harvester
kentucky
due
process
clause
meaning
permit
life
put
hazards
deny
mode
dealing
abuses
insanity
pleas
unedifying
spectacles
expert
testimony
deprive
oregon
widest
possible
choice
remedies
circumventing
abuses
multiform
legislation
prevailing
different
evinces
great
variety
experimental
methods
open
dealing
problems
raised
insanity
defenses
prosecutions
murder
repeat
extreme
reluctance
find
constitutional
barrier
legislation
mouth
threadbare
phrase
especially
deference
due
policy
state
deals
local
crime
repression
punishment
gulf
however
narrow
deference
local
legislation
complete
disregard
duty
judicial
review
fallen
virtue
limits
placed
fourteenth
amendment
upon
state
action
duty
escaped
whatever
may
think
investing
judges
power
enforcement
amendment
involves