Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Montana Supreme Court weighs whether defendant can seek mitigated deliberate homicide while claiming self‑defense
Summary
At oral argument in State v. Andrew John Smith, counsel debated whether a district court properly excluded psychiatric evaluation evidence and therefore prevented a jury from considering a mitigated deliberate homicide instruction alongside a justifiable‑use‑of‑force defense.
The Montana Supreme Court heard oral argument in State of Montana v. Andrew John Smith on legal questions over whether evidence of the defendant’s prior delusions and psychiatric evaluation could be used to support a jury instruction on mitigated deliberate homicide while Smith also asserted justifiable use of force.
The case matters because it asks whether a defendant charged with deliberate homicide must forfeit a lesser‑included instruction (mitigated deliberate homicide) if the defendant also advances an affirmative acquittal defense of justifiable use of force, and whether a pretrial motion in limine excluding mental disease or defect (MDD) evidence was correct.
At argument, Colin Stevens, attorney for the appellant Andrew Smith, told the court that the district court’s…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
