State of New Jersey v. Stefan Krol
New Jersey Supreme Court
344 A.2d 289 (1975)
- Written by Monica Rottermann , JD
Facts
Stefan Krol (defendant) was acquitted of stabbing his wife to death by reason of insanity, due to a schizophrenic delusion that caused Krol to believe his wife and employer were plotting his murder. The governing statute allowed for involuntary commitment without any consideration for an individual’s actual threat level, requiring only a finding by the jury that the insanity continues. Because the jury found that Krol remained insane, he was confined until such time that he evidenced a complete cure—the only means of establishing a restoration to reason. Krol challenged the constitutionality of the state’s involuntary-commitment procedure, arguing that the procedure violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The New Jersey Supreme Court granted certification, because this was an issue of first impression.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pashman, J.)
Dissent (Clifford, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
