Overview of the California Insanity Defense
California law recognizes the insanity defense for criminal defendants who were legally insane at the time they committed a crime. If a defendant successfully proves legal insanity, they cannot be convicted of the offense.
Instead of being sentenced to prison, a defendant found not guilty by reason of insanity may be committed to a state mental hospital for treatment.
California follows the McNaghten rule to determine whether a defendant was legally insane at the time of the alleged offense.
This legal standard focuses on whether the defendant understood the nature of their actions or knew they were morally wrong.
Your best hope for a favorable outcome is with an experienced California criminal defense attorney at Eisner Gorin LLP.
To schedule a consultation, call (818) 781-1570 or contact us here.
What Is the McNaghten Rule?
The McNaghten rule is the legal test used in California to determine whether a defendant was legally insane when a crime was committed.
Under this rule, a defendant is considered legally insane if either of the following conditions existed at the time of the offense:
-
the defendant did not understand the nature and quality of the criminal act, or
-
the defendant did not understand that the act was morally wrong
Importantly, the defendant need not prove both conditions. Demonstrating either one can satisfy the legal definition of insanity.
Burden of Proof in an Insanity Defense
The insanity defense is considered an affirmative defense under California law.
This means the defendant has the burden of proving legal insanity.
To succeed, the defendant must show by a preponderance of the evidence that they were legally insane when the crime occurred.
Preponderance of the evidence means it is more likely than not that the defendant was legally insane at the time of the offense.
The prosecutor's role is to challenge the defendant's claim and present evidence suggesting the defendant understood the nature of their actions or knew the conduct was wrong.
Temporary vs. Permanent Insanity
The McNaghten rule does not require a mental illness to be permanent.
Both temporary and long-term mental conditions may qualify if they prevented the defendant from understanding the nature of the act or distinguishing right from wrong at the time of the crime.
However, the insanity defense cannot be based solely on voluntary intoxication or addiction to drugs or alcohol.
Using drugs or alcohol at the time of the offense does not qualify as legal insanity under California law.
How Common Is the Insanity Defense?
Despite frequent public discussion of the insanity defense, it is rarely used in criminal cases.
Studies have shown that only about one percent of criminal defendants in the United States assert the insanity defense.
Even fewer cases result in a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.
Because the legal standard is strict, defendants must present substantial medical and psychiatric evidence supporting their claim.
What Happens After a Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity Verdict?
When a defendant is found not guilty by reason of insanity under Penal Code 1026, the court commits the defendant to the California Department of State Hospitals.
The defendant will be treated in a state mental hospital rather than sent to prison.
Patients in state hospitals typically face significant restrictions on their freedom, although conditions differ from those in prison.
For example, patients may experience:
-
greater access to treatment programs
-
more frequent family visitation
-
a more therapeutic living environment
The purpose of the commitment is treatment and evaluation of the defendant's mental condition.
Conditional Release Through CONREP
Some defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity may later qualify for conditional release through a community outpatient treatment program.
This program is commonly referred to as CONREP.
Under Penal Code sections 1603 and 1604, the director of the state hospital may recommend that the defendant be placed in outpatient treatment if the patient no longer poses a danger to the public.
The process generally includes several steps:
-
the hospital director submits a recommendation to the court
-
the court forwards the recommendation to the prosecutor, defense counsel, and CONREP administrators
-
the CONREP director prepares a treatment plan and recommendation
-
the court schedules a hearing to determine whether the defendant qualifies for outpatient treatment
The defendant must demonstrate that outpatient treatment would not pose a danger to public safety.
Court Hearing for Outpatient Placement
After receiving recommendations from treatment providers, the court holds a hearing to determine whether conditional release is appropriate.
During the hearing, the court may consider:
-
recommendations from doctors and treatment professionals
-
the circumstances of the underlying criminal offense
-
the defendant's prior criminal history
-
statements from victims or family members
The defense must prove that releasing the defendant into supervised outpatient treatment would not endanger the community.
If approved, the defendant is placed in a supervised treatment program rather than remaining in the hospital.
Restoration of Sanity – Penal Code 1026.2
Another pathway for release is restoration of sanity under Penal Code 1026.2.
This process allows a defendant who was previously found not guilty by reason of insanity to seek full restoration of sanity.
An application for restoration of sanity may be filed by:
-
the defendant
-
the director of the state hospital
-
the director of the CONREP program
Before the court acts on the request, treatment providers must submit a written recommendation regarding the defendant's mental condition.
The Restoration of Sanity Process
The restoration of sanity procedure typically occurs in two stages.
First, the court conducts a hearing to determine whether the defendant should be placed in outpatient treatment.
The legal question at this stage is whether the defendant would pose a danger to others if treated in the community.
If the defendant succeeds at this stage, they are placed in CONREP for a period of one year.
After completing one year of outpatient treatment, the court conducts a restoration of sanity trial.
Restoration of Sanity Trial
The restoration of sanity trial determines whether the defendant should be fully released from court supervision.
Unlike the earlier outpatient hearing, the defendant has the right to a jury trial during the restoration phase.
The defendant must again prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they are no longer a danger to the health or safety of others.
If the jury or judge rules in favor of the defendant, the court will grant unconditional release.
Once unconditional release is granted, the court loses jurisdiction over the case.
See related article: Release to outpatient and restoration of sanity after NGI verdict.
Conditional Release vs. Full Restoration
Conditional release through CONREP and full restoration of sanity serve different purposes.
Conditional release allows a defendant to live in the community under supervision and treatment.
Full restoration of sanity permanently ends the court's jurisdiction over the defendant.
Courts and treatment providers often evaluate these options carefully to determine which path best protects public safety while supporting the defendant's mental health recovery.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the McNaghten rule in California?
The McNaghten rule is the legal standard used to determine whether a defendant was legally insane at the time of a crime. It focuses on whether the defendant understood the nature of their actions or knew the conduct was morally wrong.
What does not guilty by reason of insanity mean?
A verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity means the defendant committed the act but was legally insane at the time. Instead of prison, the defendant is committed to a state mental hospital for treatment.
Can someone be released after an insanity verdict?
Yes. A defendant may later be released through conditional outpatient treatment or restoration of sanity if the court determines they no longer pose a danger to the public.
How difficult is it to prove insanity in California?
The insanity defense is difficult to prove because the defendant must present strong psychiatric evidence showing they were legally insane at the time of the crime.
Speak With a California Criminal Defense Lawyer
Cases involving mental illness and criminal responsibility are legally complex and require experienced legal representation.
A defense attorney may work with forensic psychologists and medical experts to evaluate whether the insanity defense may apply.
Eisner Gorin LLP is a criminal defense law firm representing clients throughout Southern California in serious felony and mental health related criminal cases.
Contact our office to schedule a confidential consultation and discuss your legal options.
Related Content:
If you have one phone call from jail, call us! If you are facing criminal charges,