imposition of administrative discipline and criminal punishment are "distinct and separate" even though based on same act, and therefore no double punishment
How later courts described this case
- imposition of administrative discipline and criminal punishment are "distinct and separate" even though based on same act, and therefore no double punishment
- defendant chai’ged with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876, mailing a threatening letter; letter quoted in full
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
KNOCH, Circuit Judge
(dissenting in part).
I join in Judge Duffy’s opinion with the following proviso. If we are to recommend an instruction for the future I would prefer to use the LaBuy instruction from § 5.03 of the Manual on Jury Instructions — Criminal with two small changes as shown below. The added word is in brackets. The omitted words are lined out.
The defendant has interposed insanity as a defense. The law presumes that a defendant is sane. This presumption is rebuttable. Where a defendant introduces some evidence that he had a mental disease or defect at the time of the commission of the crime charged, the prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant did not have a mental disease, or that despite the mental disease he had the capacity either to know the criminality of his conduct, er [and] to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.
I would make this a recommendation only. I would not like to see any ironclad rule imposed on District Judges with the disastrous result that minor semantic variations which do not change the basic meaning would result in reversals.