United States v. Edwards
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
819 F.2d 262 (1987)
- Written by Nicole Gray , JD
Facts
A jury found Roland Edwards (defendant) guilty after a two-day trial for unarmed robbery. Edwards did not dispute his involvement in the robbery, but he pleaded that he was not guilty by reason of insanity. At trial, Edwards presented medical-expert testimony from his treating psychiatrist, who testified that he strongly suspected that Edwards was suffering from manic-depressive illness at the time of the robbery. The government’s rebuttal psychiatrist testified that he did not believe that Edwards was in an active manic state at the time of the robbery because Edwards’s actions were reasonably well controlled and goal oriented. However, the government’s expert noted that Edwards’s IRS debt and financial troubles had been bothering him tremendously and added that it would be understandable if Edwards were upset about his circumstances and be desperate to change them. On appeal, Edwards argued that the trial court erred by allowing the government’s expert to testify to the ultimate issue of sanity.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Vance, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.