Alaska Stat. » Chapter 12.47
Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010 (2026)

Insanity as affirmative defense

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 12.47.010. Insanity as affirmative defense.
 (a) In a prosecution for a crime, it is an affirmative defense that when the defendant engaged in the criminal conduct, the defendant was unable, as a result of a mental disease or defect, to appreciate the nature and quality of that conduct.

 (b) The affirmative defense defined in (a) of this section may not be raised at trial unless the defendant, within 10 days of entering a plea or such later time as the court may for good cause permit, files a written notice of intent to rely on the defense.

 (c) Evidence of a mental disease or defect that is manifested only by repeated criminal or other antisocial conduct is not sufficient to establish the affirmative defense under (a) of this section.

 (d) The affirmative defense specified in (a) of this section is the affirmative defense of insanity. A defendant who successfully raises the affirmative defense of insanity shall be found not guilty by reason of insanity and the verdict shall so state.




Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1985–2021 · leading case: Barrett v. State, 772 P.2d 559 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Barrett v. State, 772 P.2d 559 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 57× “test [former AS 12.45.083] — first, those who were unable as a result of mental disease or defect to appreciate the nature and quality of their conduct; second, those who by virtue of mental disease or defect were unable to appreciate that their acts were wrong; and third, those…”
State v. Patterson, 740 P.2d 944 (Alaska 1987). · cites it 21× “She believes that AS 12.47.010 permits her to be adjudged guilty in the absence of any conscious wrongdoing or criminal intent on her part.”
Hart v. State, 702 P.2d 651 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 12× “083(a); and the new statutory insanity defense, AS 12.47.010. Before we proceed to a discussion of the three tests of criminal responsibility, however, it is necessary to point out one recurring problem in the analysis.”
Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006). · cites it 2× “13 Alaska Stat. §12.47.010 (2004). 14 Ariz. Rev.”
Palmer v. State, 379 P.3d 981 (Alaska Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “1 See AS 12.47.010(a); AS 12.47.020(a). 2 See AS 12.”
Lord v. State, 262 P.3d 855 (Alaska Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 11× “But she asserts that Judge Volland erred by using these same findings to reject her affirmative defense of not guilty by reason of insanity under AS 12.47.010. Lord argues that if the legislature intended to restrict the insanity defense to only an inquiry about whether a…”
Kahler v. Kansas, 140 S. Ct. 1021 (2020). “See Alaska Stat. §§ 12.47.010 (a), 12.47.020 (2018) ; Idaho Code Ann.”
Lane v. Ballot, 330 P.3d 338 (Alaska 2014). · cites it 3× “AS 12.47.010(@a). 26 . AS 12.47.030(a). 27 .”
Patterson v. State, 708 P.2d 712 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 5× “She appeals her conviction, contending that Alaska’s current insanity statutes, AS 12.47.010 et seq., violate the state and federal constitutional guarantees of (1) due process, (2) equal protection, and (3) the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.”
Lewis v. State, 195 P.3d 622 (Alaska Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “Lewis likewise concedes that he would have had no Fifth Amendment claim if he had asserted the alternative defense of diminished capacity defined in AS 12.”
State v. Herrera, 1999 UT 64 (Utah 1999). · cites it 2× “[12] See Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010 (Michie 1998); Idaho Code § 18-207 (1997); Kan.”
Nelson v. State, 874 P.2d 298 (Alaska Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “(Nelson’s attorney was apparently referring to AS 12.47.010 and AS 12.47.020.) Based upon the defense attorney’s representation, Superior Court Judge Brian C.”
Show all 21 citing cases →
— Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010(2) — 1 case
Lord v. State, 262 P.3d 855 (Alaska Ct. App. 2011). “But she asserts that Judge Volland erred by using these same findings to reject her affirmative defense of not guilty by reason of insanity under AS 12.47.010. Lord argues that if the legislature intended to restrict the insanity defense to only an inquiry about whether a…”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010(a) — 8 cases
State v. Patterson, 740 P.2d 944 (Alaska 1987). “She believes that AS 12.47.010 permits her to be adjudged guilty in the absence of any conscious wrongdoing or criminal intent on her part.”
Palmer v. State, 379 P.3d 981 (Alaska Ct. App. 2016). “1 See AS 12.47.010(a); AS 12.47.020(a). 2 See AS 12.”
Lord v. State, 262 P.3d 855 (Alaska Ct. App. 2011). “But she asserts that Judge Volland erred by using these same findings to reject her affirmative defense of not guilty by reason of insanity under AS 12.47.010. Lord argues that if the legislature intended to restrict the insanity defense to only an inquiry about whether a…”
Jackson v. State, 890 P.2d 587 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995).
Lane v. Ballot, 330 P.3d 338 (Alaska 2014). “AS 12.47.010(@a). 26 . AS 12.47.030(a). 27 .”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010(a2) — 1 case
Lord v. State, 262 P.3d 855 (Alaska Ct. App. 2011). “But she asserts that Judge Volland erred by using these same findings to reject her affirmative defense of not guilty by reason of insanity under AS 12.47.010. Lord argues that if the legislature intended to restrict the insanity defense to only an inquiry about whether a…”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010(b) — 2 cases
Palmer v. State, 379 P.3d 981 (Alaska Ct. App. 2016). “1 See AS 12.47.010(a); AS 12.47.020(a). 2 See AS 12.”
Palmer v. State (Alaska Ct. App. 2016).
— Alaska Stat. § 12.47.010(d) — 1 case
Lane v. Ballot, 330 P.3d 338 (Alaska 2014). “AS 12.47.010(@a). 26 . AS 12.47.030(a). 27 .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.