Jan 16, 1997 · Consequently, Arizona does not allow evidence of a defendant's mental disorder short of insanity either as an affirmative defense or to negate the mens rea element of a crime.

We hold that the proffered evidence was inadmissible as an attempt to prove defendant's diminished capacity. We vacate the court of appeals' opinion. Furthermore, we overrule …

We therefore hold that the trial court committed reversible error in excluding the expert testimony about Mott's battered woman diagnosis and characteristics. In view of our resolution of this …

Below, Arizona argued, repeatedly, that. Clark intentionally shot a police officer.

Jan 16, 1997 · Shelly Kay Mott ("defendant") was convicted of two counts of child abuse and first-degree murder. The trial court precluded defendant from introducing expert psychological …

Summaries of State v. Mott — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.

Mott, 187 Ariz. 536, 931 P. 2d 1046, which refused to allow psychiatric testimony to negate specific intent and held that Arizona does not allow evidence of a mental disorder short of …

In Mott, the Arizona Supreme Court held that “Arizona does not allow evidence of a defendant’s mental disorder short of insanity either as an affirmative defense or to negate the mens rea …

ERIC MICHAEL CLARK, PETITIONER v. ARIZONA ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE [June 29, 2006]

In State v. Mott, 183 Ariz. 191, 901 P.2d 1221 (App.1995), the defendant was convicted of child abuse and murder after her child was murdered by the defendant's boyfriend.