This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Summary: Grant was convicted of aggravated battery for assaulting a police officer. His defense was that he suffers from a medical condition (epilepsy/seizure) which prevents his conscious mind from controlling his actions. The problem were the jury instructions which did not address the alleged involuntary behavior, but only insanity. But the Df's claim is quite different from insanity. You're insane, but you're still making the choice to move your body. So the court remanded with the directions to the jury that he would not be held criminally liable unless he had adequate prior notice to his susceptibility to engage in violent involuntary conduct brought on by drinking alcohol or other conscious causal behavior. RULE: If the conscious mind loses control over the body's acts, then the act in question was not voluntary. However, if there is adequate prior notice of the person's susceptibility to engage in violent involuntary conduct, and still acts consciously to cause that behavior, then those actions are voluntary. (widen the "time-frame") Notes: o Involuntary Acts • MPC 2.01 excludes the following from the definition of a voluntary act: A reflex or convulsion A bodily movement during unconsciousness or sleep Conduct during hypnosis or resulting from hypnotic suggestion A bodily movement that otherwise is not a product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual. Class Notes • People v. Decina - someone prone to epileptic seizure was driving, have a seizure while driving and killed 4 people. o Anticipating involuntariness - there was a history of seizure, they knew this could happen The voluntary act is the choice to drive even though there is a history of seizure. So it is culpable. o But, this doesn’t count if this is the first time some medical condition has occurred. There was no warning so the act was involuntary.