People v. Wolff
California Supreme Court
61 Cal.2d 795 (1964)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
The State of California (plaintiff) prosecuted Ronald Wolff (defendant) for murdering his mother. Wolff pleaded not guilty by reason of schizophrenic insanity. The contemporary medical understanding of schizophrenia remained imperfect. However, doctors generally agreed that although schizophrenia can lead to insanity, it usually leaves its sufferers able to lead normal law-abiding lives. At trial, four psychiatrists gave their expert opinions that Wolff killed his mother under an irresistible impulse arising from schizophrenia and that therefore he was legally insane at the time. Other evidence corroborated the doctors' description of Wolff's schizophrenic symptoms and the impulsiveness of Wolff's actions. However, there was also substantial evidence that Wolff killed his mother despite being fully aware that it was wrong to do so. The jury found that Wolff was sane at the time and convicted him. On appeal to the California Supreme Court, Wolff pointed to the inconsistency between the jury's verdict and the unanimous expert testimony as to his insanity.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schauer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
