No. 18-6135 In the Supreme Court of the United States JAMES K. KAHLER, Petitioner, v. KANSAS, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE KANSAS SUPREME COURT BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE LEGAL HISTORI- ANS AND SOCIOLOGISTS IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER Allison R. McLaughlin* Theresa Wardon Benz Wheeler Trigg O’Donnell LLP 370 17th Street, Suite 4500 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 244-1800 [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Amici Curiae JUNE 7, 2019 *Counsel of Record TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ....................................... iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ................................ 1 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ............................ 2 ARGUMENT ................................................................ 5 I. ISSUES OF INSANITY AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY HAVE BEEN DEBATED SINCE ANTIQUITY ...................... 5 II. MORAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CRIMES EMERGED AS A BEDROCK PRINCIPLE OF ANGLO-AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE ........................................... 9 A. The common law concept of mens rea sets the stage for defenses based on lack of moral culpability ....... 10 B. The insanity defense takes shape in the centuries before the M’Naghten Rules .................................. 12 C. Hadfield in 1800 extends the insanity defense to those who, because of their delusions, intended to commit crime .................... 15 D. Between 1800 and 1843, moral guilt solidifies as a necessary component to conviction ....................... 18 ii E. The M’Naghten Rules formalize the necessity of moral guilt for a crime ..................................................... 21 CONCLUSION .......................................................... 24 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page CASES Ball’s Case, 2 City-Hall Recorder 85 (N.Y.C. 1817) .................. 24 Commonwealth v. Miller, 1 Phrenological J. 272 (1838) ................................ 24 Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968) .................................................. 3 Holloway v. United States, 148 F.2d 665 (D.C. Cir. 1945) .................................. 5 M’Naghten’s Case, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 (1843) ........................................... 23 Montana v. Egelhoff, 518 U.S. 37 (1996) .................................................... 3 Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977) .................................................. 3 Morissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246 (1952) .................................................. 4 Sinclair v. State, 132 So. 581 (Miss. 1931) .................................... 4, 25 State v. Herrera, 895 P.2d 359 (Utah 1995) (Stewart, J., dissenting) .......................................................................... 3, 4, 5 iv State v. Korell, 690 P.2d 992 (Mont. 1984) ..................................... 24 State v. Mahn, 25 Kan. 182 (Kan. 1881) ........................................ 23 OTHER AUTHORITIES 1 Kings 3:9 ................................................................... 6 1 Nigel D. Walker, Crime and Insanity in England, The Historical Part, 40 (1968) ......................... 11, 12 1 The Digest of Justinian 821.11 (Alan Watson trans., Univ. Pa. Press 1985) (c. 533 A.D.) ......................... 5 4 William Blackstone, Commentaries (1765–1769).. 13 Anthony Platt & Bernard Diamond, The Origins and Development of the “Wild Beast” Concept of Mental Illness and Its Relation to Theories of Criminal Responsibility, 1 J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 355 (1965) .... 3 Anthony Platt & Bernard L. Diamond, The Origins of the Right and Wrong Test of Criminal Responsibility and its Subsequent Development in the United States: An Historical Survey, 54 Cal. L. Rev. 1227 (1966) ............................................. passim Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics 58 (Ross transl. 1954) (c. 384 B.C.E.) ................................................ 7 Augustine, On the Forgiveness of Sins and Baptism Book I, Ch. 66–67) .................................................... 9 v B. Jones, The Law and Legal Theory of the Greeks 264 (1956) ................................................................. 3 Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy: Purgatorio Canto 16, 66–84 ....................................................... 7 Eugene J. Chesney, Concept of Mens Rea in the Criminal Law 29 J. Crim. L. & Crim. 627 (1939)........................................... 10, 11 Francis B. Sayre, Mens Rea, 45 Harv. L. Rev. 974 (1932) .................................................................. 9, 12 Galen On the Affected Parts 93 (Rudolph E. Siegel trans. & ed. 1976)..................................................... 8 George Horowitz, The Spirit of Jewish Law 167–70 (1933) ........................................................................ 6 Hebrews 5:14 ................................................................ 6 James Prichard, A Treatise on Insanity and Other Disorders Affecting the Mind 12, 95 (1835)........... 19 Joel P. Eigen, Mad-doctors in the Dock: Defending the Diagnosis 29–49 (2016) .......................... 8, 16, 18, 19 Joel P. Eigen, Witnessing Insanity: Madness and Mad-doctors in the English Court ................. passim John H. Langbein, Shaping the Eighteenth-Century Criminal Trial: A View from the Ryder Sources, 50 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1, 263 (1983).................................. 13 John Wigmore, Responsibility for Tortious Acts: Its History, 7 Harv. L. Rev. 315 (1894) ..................... 8, 9 vi Kathryn J. Fritz, Note, The Proposed Insanity Defense: Should the Quality of Mercy Suffer for the Sake of Safety?, 22 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 49 (1984) .. 12 Michael Dalton, The Countrey Justice 244 (1630) ... 13 Naomi Hurnard, The King’s Pardon Before A.D. 1307 (1969) ...................................................................... 12 Nigel D. Walker, The Insanity Defense Before 1800, 477 Annals Am. Acad. Pol. & Soc. Sci. 25 (1985) .. 7, 8, 11 Norman J. Finkel, Insanity on Trial (1988) ....... 11, 15 Phillipe Pinel, A Treatise on Insanity 15–56 (D.D. Davis transl. 1806) ................................................. 19 Plato, Laws Book XI, at 934 (Thomas L. Pangle trans., 1988) (c. 345 B.C.) ........................................ 6 Plato, The Republic 350 (F.M. Cornford trans., 1945)7 Richard Moran, Knowing Right from Wrong: the Insanity Defense of Daniel McNaughtan 1 (1981) 21 Richard Moran, The Origins of Insanity as a Special Verdict: The Trial for Treason of James Hadfield (1800), 19 Law & Society Rev. 487 (1985) ............ 16 Richard Moran, The Origins of Insanity as a Special Verdict: The Trial for Treason of James Hadfield (1800), 19 Law & Society Rev., 487–519 (1985)... 16, 17, 18, 19 vii Richard Moran, The Punitive Uses of the Insanity Defense: The Trial for Treason of Edward Oxford (1840), 9 Int. J. Law & Psychiatry 171–90 (1986) 20 Robert H Dreher, Origin, Development and Present Status of Insanity as a Defense to Criminal Responsibility in the Common Law, 3 J. H. Behav. Sci. 47, 49–52 (1967) ................................................ 9 Sir Matthew Hale, History of the Pleas of the Crown 14–15 (1736) ........................................................... 13 The Babylonian Talmud, Baba Kamma 501–02 (I. Epstein ed. 1935) (c. 500)......................................... 6 The Reports of Sir Edward Coke 124 (George Wilson ed. 1777) ................................................................. 12 Tr. of Daniel M’Naughten (Feb. 27, 1843), Old Bailey Proceedings Online, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=def1 -874-18430227&div=t18430227-874#highlight (last visited June 5, 2019) .............................................. 22 Tr. of Edward Oxford (July 6, 1840), Old Bailey Proceedings Online, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=t18 400706-1877 (last visited June 5, 2019) ......... 20, 21 Tr. of Francis Parr (Jan. 15, 1787), Old Bailey Proceedings Online, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t178 70115-1-person10&div=t17870115-1#highlight (last visited June 5, 2019) ............................ 4, 13, 14 viii Tr. of John Hollingsworth (Sept. 14, 1840), Old Bailey Proceedings Online, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=t18 400914-2316 (last visited June 5, 2019) ............... 19 Tr. of Samuel Burt (July 19, 1786), Old Bailey Proceedings Online, https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?div=t17 860719-31 (last visited June 5, 2019) ................... 14 William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar act 1, sc. 2, 140– 41 .............................................................................. 7 Yearbooks of Henry VII, 21 Michaelmas Term, plea 16 (1505) ................................................................. 12 1 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE1 Amici curiae are four of the leading experts on the insanity defense and Anglo-American legal history. Joel P. Eigen, the lead contributor to this brief, is Emeritus Charles A. Dana Professor of Sociology at Franklin & Marshall College, where he focuses on mental derangement and criminal responsibility, juve- nile justice, and capital punishment. Eigen has been teaching and writing about the insanity defense and related issues throughout his career. Eigen published Witnessing Insanity: Madness and Mad-doctors in the English Court, the first systematic investigation of the evolution of medical testimony in British insanity tri- als from its beginnings in 1760 to 1843, when the in- sanity rules were formulated during the trial of Daniel M’Naghten. Thomas A. Green is John Philip Dawson Professor of Law, Emeritus, of the University of Michigan Law School, where he focuses