Discussion 7

The defendant shot and killed a police officer and then escaped on foot. He was thereafter charged with first-degree murder. The defendant wants to claim that his diagnosed paranoid schizophrenia affected his ability to form the intent required for murder. In your state (Arizona), the defendant cannot introduce this argument to negate intent; he can only plead insanity under an abbreviated version of M’Naghten, which requires proof that the defendant did not know his conduct was wrong because of a mental defect or disease. Will you accept or reject the case? Read Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006), which is available at this link Link (Links to an external site.)

All initial posts should reference the textbook or at least one outside source. All sources must be cited using APA guidelines. 

Assignment 7

Compare and contrast the defenses of Infancy, Intoxication, Ignorance, and Mistake. Provide examples of each.

The paper must be 1-2 pages.

Use proper APA formatting and citations, including ‘in-text’ citations.

Discussion 8 

he defendant’s vehicle matched the description of a vehicle seen in the vicinity of a burglary before the burglary, during the burglary, and after the burglary. The defendant claimed that the evidence was insufficient to prove he was an accomplice to the burglary. Does this case illustrate the legal concept of accomplice act, accomplice intent, or both?