United States v. James E. McCracken

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that trial court committed reversible error when jury instructions informed jury of the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity in a criminal trial
• concluding that such an instruction could only induce a guilty verdict
• concluding that such an instruction could only induce a guilty verdict
• approving verdict form with not guilty/not guilty by reason of insanity options, special verdicts generally disapproved
• conflicting expert testimony coupled with lay testimony supporting sanity sufficient to affirm jury verdict of sanity
• psychiatrist appointed to determine defendant’s sanity both at time of trial and at time of commission of the offense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).