Iowa Code

Iowa Code § 701.4 (2026)

Insanity

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IA-LEGlegis.iowa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A person shall not be convicted of a crime if at the time the crime is committed the person suffers from such a diseased or deranged condition of the mind as to render the person incapable of knowing the nature and quality of the act the person is committing or incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong in relation to that act. Insanity need not exist for any specific length of time before or after the commission of the alleged criminal act. If the defense of insanity is raised, the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant at the time of the crime suffered from such a deranged condition of the mind as to render the defendant incapable of knowing the nature and quality of the act the defendant was committing or was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong in relation to the act. [C79, 81, §701.4] 84 Acts, ch 1320, §1

\n
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: State of Iowa v. Mark Daryl Becker, 818 N.W.2d 135 (Iowa 2012).
State of Iowa v. Mark Daryl Becker, 818 N.W.2d 135 (Iowa 2012). · cites it 75× “Iowa Code § 701.4 . 3 As used in the statute, “the words ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ .”
State v. James, 393 N.W.2d 465 (Iowa 1986). · cites it 44× “Defendant's only assignment of error on appeal is a constitutional challenge to Iowa Code section 701.4 (1983) and Iowa rule of criminal procedure 10(11)(b)(1) which place on an accused the burden to establish an insanity defense by a preponderance of the evidence.”
State v. Kehoe, 804 N.W.2d 302 (Iowa Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 32× “Iowa Code § 701.4 ; see also Anfinson, 758 N.”
State v. Wheeler, 403 N.W.2d 58 (Iowa Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 26× “The Iowa legislature codified the M'Naghten rule on insanity defenses in Iowa Code § 701.4 (1985). State v. Collins, 305 N.”
Lynn G. Lamasters Vs. State of Iowa, 821 N.W.2d 856 (Iowa 2012). · cites it 4× “With both defenses, it is assumed the 13 defendant committed the acts in question. The insanity defense, however, urges that the defendant was “incapable of knowing the nature and quality of the act [being committed] or incapable of distinguishing between right or wrong in…”
Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006). · cites it 2× “Code §35–41–3–6(b) (West 2004) (excluding from definition of “mental disease or defect” “abnormality manifested only by repeated unlawful or antisocial conduct”). We need not compare the standards under a finer lens because our coarser analysis shows that the standards vary…”
State v. McVey, 376 N.W.2d 585 (Iowa 1985). · cites it 8× “1245, § 104 (codified at Iowa Code § 701.4 (1979)). The statute incorporates the M'Naghten standard previously adopted by this court as a common law rule.”
State v. Moses, 320 N.W.2d 581 (Iowa 1982). · cites it 8× “Section 701.4, The Code 1979, provides: No person shall be convicted of any crime if at the time such crime is committed the person suffers from such a diseased or deranged condition of the mind so as to render the person incapable of knowing the nature and quality of the act he…”
State of Iowa v. Travis Howard Richard Beck, 854 N.W.2d 56 (Iowa Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Cf Iowa Code § 701.4 (codifying defense of insanity); Iowa Code § 701.”
State v. Craney, 347 N.W.2d 668 (Iowa 1984). · cites it 4× “In its overhaul of Iowa criminal law, the General Assembly dealt with the defense of insanity in section 701.4 of the Iowa Code: No person shall be convicted of any crime if at the time such crime is committed the person suffers from such a diseased or deranged condition of the…”
Anfinson v. State, 758 N.W.2d 496 (Iowa 2008). · cites it 2× “The legal standard for an insanity defense in Iowa is codified at section 701.4 of the Iowa Code: A person shall not be convicted of a crime if at the time the crime is committed the person suffers from such a diseased or deranged condition of the mind as to render the person…”
State v. Hamann, 285 N.W.2d 180 (Iowa 1979). · cites it 4× “The M'Naghten rule has since been codified in section 701.4, The Code 1979. The defendant argues strenuously that, notwithstanding the subsequent codification of the rule, we should overrule the common law doctrine as a guide to the bench, bar, and legislature.”
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.