Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil commitment (1)
- Civil pleading (1)
- Code pleading (1)
- Cognitive & control tests (1)
- Common law (1)
-
- Criminal law & procedure (1)
- Essential facts (1)
- FRCP 8(a) (1)
- FRCrP 7(c) (1)
- Fact pleading (1)
- Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) (1)
- Fed. R. Crim. P. 7(c) (1)
- Federal Rules (1)
- Indictment (1)
- Insanity defense (1)
- Legal history (1)
- MPC (1)
- Meaning of Rule 7(c) (1)
- Mens rea (1)
- Mental disorder (1)
- Model Penal Code (1)
- M’Naghten test (1)
- Pleading history (1)
- Pleading requirements (1)
- Production & persuasion burden (1)
- Psychology (1)
- Relationship between civil & criminal pleading (1)
- Resendiz-Ponce (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Before And After Hinckley: Legal Insanity In The United States, Stephen J. Morse
Before And After Hinckley: Legal Insanity In The United States, Stephen J. Morse
All Faculty Scholarship
This chapter first considers the direction of the affirmative defense of legal insanity in the United States before John Hinckley was acquitted by reason of insanity in 1982 for attempting to assassinate President Reagan and others and the immediate aftermath of that acquittal. Since the middle of the 20th Century, the tale is one of the rise and fall of the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code test for legal insanity. Then it turns to the constitutional decisions of the United States Supreme Court concerning the status of legal insanity. Finally, it addresses the substantive and procedural changes that …
A Formulaic Recitation Will Not Do: Why The Federal Rules Demand More Detail In Criminal Pleading, Charles Eric Hintz
A Formulaic Recitation Will Not Do: Why The Federal Rules Demand More Detail In Criminal Pleading, Charles Eric Hintz
All Faculty Scholarship
When a plaintiff files a civil lawsuit in federal court, her complaint must satisfy certain minimum standards. Specifically, under the prevailing understanding of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), a complaint must plead sufficient factual matter to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face, rather than mere conclusory statements. Given the significantly higher stakes involved in criminal cases, one might think that an even more robust requirement would exist in that context. But in fact a weaker pleading standard reigns. Under the governing interpretation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 7(c), indictments that simply parrot the …