Miller v. StateSupreme Court of Nevada, 1996991 P. 2d 1183People in the United States commit crimes and make up excuses why they should not be held accountable for a crime. Insanity and temporary Insanity have significant differences. One might ask themselves ÃÂis there really any meaningful difference?ÃÂ During the history of our court system there has been many significant court decisions which address the controversy topicÃÂs of insanity and temporary insanity as it relates to criminal procedures. One of the most significant court decision is Miller Vs State Supreme Court of Nevada, 1996 991 P.2d 1183.
FactsOn May 8, 1993, hearing a commotion, Officer Maria Jordan went to an upstairs neighborÃÂs apartment; when John K. Miller opened the door she noticed bloodstains on MillerÃÂs clothes. Officers responded to the 911 call and observed MillerÃÂs girlfriend and mother of their two children, Robyn Goring, lying on the kitchen floor with a knife protruding from her torso.
On June 10, 1993, Miller was charged with first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon (Schmalleger, 2002).
At the trial, GoringÃÂs mother and sister testified that Goring was going to leave Miller because he was too controlling and violent towards her. A psychiatry expert, Thomas Bittker, testified that MillerÃÂs medical history ÃÂconspicuously lackedÃÂ any evidence of amnesia or a violent episode associated with a specific seizure and that there was no clear evidence existed to connect his seizure episode with the killing of Goring (Schmalleger, 2002).
Bittker concludes that Miller was sane at the time of the murder. Norton Roitman, a certified psychiatrist, concluded that if it were not for MillerÃÂs condition the murder of Goring would have never happened and that Miller was not sane at the time of the murder. Austin Moody, a certified neurologist, agrees with Roitman...