Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 562.086 (2026)

Lack of responsibility because of mental disease or defect

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

562.086. Lack of responsibility because of mental disease or defect. — 1. A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he was incapable of knowing and appreciating the nature, quality or wrongfulness of his or her conduct.

2. The procedures for the defense of lack of responsibility because of mental disease or defect are governed by the provisions of chapter 552.

--------

(L. 1977 S.B. 60, A.L. 1993 S.B. 180, A.L. 2014 S.B. 491)

Effective 1-01-17

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1984–2020 · leading case: State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 686 (Mo. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 686 (Mo. 1998). · cites it 10× “[37] Section 562.086, RSMo 1994. All statutory references are to RSMo 1994.”

Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006). · cites it 2× “2001); Mo. Rev. Stat. §562.086 (2000); State v. Harms, 263 Neb.”

Kahler v. Kansas, 589 U.S. 271 (2020). “" Mo. Rev. Stat. § 562.086 (1) (2016). Nebraska "Under our current common-law definition, the two requirements for the insanity defense are that (1) the defendant had a mental disease or defect at the time of the crime and (2) the defendant did not know or understand the nature…”

State v. Elam, 779 S.W.2d 716 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 3× “Section 562.086, RSMo 1986, provides: 1. A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he did not know or appreciate the nature, quality or wrongfulness of his conduct or was incapable of conforming his…”

Mouse v. State, 90 S.W.3d 145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “Section 562.086, RSMo provides: 1. A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he was incapable of knowing and appreciating the nature, quality or wrongfulness of his conduct.”

State v. Watkins, 102 S.W.3d 570 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003). “030 and § 562.086. The trial court ordered a pretrial psychiatric evaluation, and two such evaluations were conducted.”

Stewart v. State, 678 S.W.2d 439 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984). “Movant has obviously confused the insanity defense in § 562.086 with § 562.016 which deals with the requisite mental state for criminal liability.”

Williams v. State, 766 S.W.2d 681 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “The legal file from the trial reveals that movant’s trial counsel moved for the appointment of a psychiatrist to evaluate movant as support for his defense of mental disease or defect under § 562.086, RSMo 1986, and to evaluate movant’s mental state at the time of the…”

Funkhouser v. State, 779 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Frederick Nolen, a clinical psychologist, was called by the defendant to establish that defendant was not responsible for his criminal conduct because of mental disease or defect as provided by § 562.086, RSMo 1978. Nolen was a clinical psychologist who was in practice, “most of…”

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.