← back to the Substrate Record

qid 1650 · law

Question: A husband is charged with murder in the shooting death of his brother-in-law. In the jurisdiction in which the husband is on trial for murder, the defense of insanity is an affirmative defense. The husband pleads insanity as his defense. At trial, in order to prove his defense of insanity, the husband has

  1. neither the burden of production nor the burden of persuasion.
  2. the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
  3. the burden of production.
  4. the responsibility to demonstrate a history of mental illness.
  5. the requirement to provide substantial evidence of his insanity at the time of the crime.
  6. the obligation to provide expert medical testimony.
  7. the duty to prove his innocence.
  8. the necessity to convince the jury of his mental instability.
  9. the burden of persuasion only.

Our answer: C. the burden of production. Source quote machine-checked (at mint)

A machine check confirms the quoted words appear at the source. A person has not yet reviewed these. EARN MARKS as a Human Reviewer

How it was answered

Stored formula / worked method, replayed by code

Criminal procedure and the law of evidence. What the designation AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE places on a defendant, distinguishing the burden of production from the burden of persuasion.

card: formula · card sha256 d70c7bd66149b3f8…

Current source

Leland v. Oregon, 343 U.S. 790 (1952) -- a State may require the defendant to prove insanity, there beyond a reasonable doubt.

Source weak (edition_page)

retrieved 2026-09-16T22:14:06.748Z

addendum formula_qid1650.formula_ADDENDUM_source · sha256 c56b416dccaa5d0d…

If you have a Citable Source to dispute or challenge this, ADD IT so we can correct the answer by appending, never deleting. — hello@lianabanyan.com