Home      Login

Abstract: 

In U.S. v. Fackrell, the highly conservative Fifth Circuit ruled against two Texas inmates who were given death sentences and jointly challenged the Government’s statements on future dangerousness and the jury’s responsibility for their death sentences. The inmates argued that the Government committed misconduct by misapplying testimony about the defendants' childhood trauma, intended to establish mitigating factors for the defense, to support a death penalty sentence based in part on future dangerousness. This article examines the mental health dimensions of the insanity defense as articulated by the Fifth Circuit.

Keywords: U.S. v. Fackrell; Insanity Defense

Affiliations:  1: Executive Editor.