1. Identify what, if anything, is wrong with each section of the following brief. Do not worry about substance. Assume that substantive information such as facts and law are correct. This question is asking you to examine brief formatting and what should or should not be included in each section (case information, issue, rule, analysis, and conclusion). Each section could have one or more errors, or no errors. Go section by section, and fully explain errors that you find, or fully explain why there are none.

Case Information: This case started in state trial court and involved a man who committed murder and then tried to use the insanity defense, but was denied.

Issue: Can someone who suffers from ADHD and, as a result of that condition, made the poor decision to become drunk, use the affirmative defense of insanity to defend against the charge of attempted murder?

Rule: Section 1390 of the Health and Safety Code states that the insanity defense is reserved for those people who can prove that they were incompetent at the time of the crime, or at the time of trial. There is no evidence to support that ADHD causes an incompetent state of mind, as incompetence is a more severe state than the milder impairment of impulsivity or poor decision-making.

Analysis: Insanity is not a loosely defined state of mind nor one that is absent a diagnosis. The court defined it in its opinion. The defendant was Miles Jackson. He suffered from ADHD. He complained that his ADHD made it difficult for him to make good decisions. He got mad at his wife and chased her with a knife. His wife got away and called the police, and he was charged with attempted murder.

Conclusion: Because there is no evidence to support that ADHD causes an incompetent state of mind, Mr. Jackson could not win on appeal.