Murder Mitigation in the Fifty-Two American Jurisdictions: A Case Study in Doctrinal Interrelation Analysis

Simple item page
dc.creatorRobinson, Paul H.
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-25T19:56:08Z
dc.date.available2021-08-25T19:56:08Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.description.abstractSurveys the law in the fifty-two American jurisdictions with regard to the three doctrines that commonly provide a mitigation or defense to murder liability: common-law provocation and its modern counterpart, extreme mental or emotional disturbance, the so-called diminished capacity defense and its modern counterpart, mental illness negating an offense element, and the insanity defense. The essay then examines the patterns among the jurisdictions in the particular formulation they adopt for the three doctrines and the combinations in which those formulations commonly appear in different jurisdictions.en_US
dc.identifier.citationPaul H. Robinson, Murder Mitigation in the Fifty-Two American Jurisdictions: A Case Study in Doctrinal Interrelation Analysis, 47 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 19 (2014-2015)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/87761
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTexas Tech Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectAmerican Jurisdictionsen_US
dc.subjectInsanityen_US
dc.subjectMINOEen_US
dc.subjectProvocationen_US
dc.subjectExtreme mental or emotional disturbanceen_US
dc.subjectDefenses to murderen_US
dc.subjectMental illness negating and offence element
dc.subjectM'Naghten test
dc.titleMurder Mitigation in the Fifty-Two American Jurisdictions: A Case Study in Doctrinal Interrelation Analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
06_47TexTechLRev19(2014-2015).pdf
Size:
1.21 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Texas Tech Law Review