Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE · CHAPTER 14. MENTAL COMPETENCY OF ACCUSED · Part 1. Relevance of Mental Disease or Disorder
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 46-14-102 (2026)

Evidence Of Mental Disease Or Disorder Or Developmental Disability Admissible To Prove State Of Mind

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 46
  3. CHAPTER 14
  4. Part 1
  5. 46-14-102 Evidence of mental disease or disorder or developmental disability admissible to prove state of mind

TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 14. MENTAL COMPETENCY OF ACCUSED

Part 1. Relevance of Mental Disease or Disorder

Evidence Of Mental Disease Or Disorder Or Developmental Disability Admissible To Prove State Of Mind

46-14-102. Evidence of mental disease or disorder or developmental disability admissible to prove state of mind. Evidence that the defendant suffered from a mental disease or disorder or developmental disability is admissible to prove that the defendant did or did not have a state of mind that is an element of the offense.

History: En. 95-502 by Sec. 1, Ch. 196, L. 1967; R.C.M. 1947, 95-502; amd. Sec. 150, Ch. 800, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 452, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 11, Ch. 161, L. 2015.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: State v. Korell, 690 P.2d 992 (Mont. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Korell, 690 P.2d 992 (Mont. 1984). · cites it 12× “Section 46-14-102, MCA. The State retains the burden of proving each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Byers, 861 P.2d 860 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 16× “Section 46-14-102, MCA. Byers contends that his defense of mental disease or defect is inextricably intertwined with proof of "knowingly" or "purposely" which are elements of the crime.”
Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71 (1992). · cites it 4× “See Idaho Code § 18-207 (a) (1987) (mental condition not a defense to criminal charges); Mont. Code Ann. § 46-14-102 (1991) (evidence of mental illness admissible to prove absence of state of mind that is an element of the offense).”
State v. Delos Santos, 902 P.2d 510 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 6× “Section 46-14-102, MCA. Third, a defendant who has been convicted of a crime may claim during sentencing that at the time of the offense he was suffering from mental disease or defect which rendered him "unable to appreciate the criminality of [his] behavior or to conform [his]…”
State v. Collier, 919 P.2d 376 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 4× “2d 860 , that a defendant's mental disease or defect may be evaluated at three different stages of the legal proceedings: before trial, pursuant to § 46-14-103, MCA; during trial, pursuant to § 46-14-102, MCA; and during sentencing, pursuant to § 46-14-311, MCA.”
State v. Dannels, 734 P.2d 188 (Mont. 1987). · cites it 6× “Section 46-14-102, MCA, provides that applicable rule in determining whether evidence of a mental disease is relevant.”
Galloway v. State, 938 N.E.2d 699 (Ind. 2010). · cites it 2× “§ 22-3220 (2007); Mont.Code Ann. § 46-14-102 (2009). [14] The Indiana General Assembly has chosen to return to our common law roots and hold criminally responsible only those defendants who are morally responsible for their actions.”
State v. Doney, 636 P.2d 1377 (Mont. 1981). · cites it 4× “Defendant relies primarily upon § 46-14-102, MCA, which states: “Evidence that the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect is admissible whenever it is relevant to prove that the defendant did or did not have a state of mind which is an element of the offense.”
Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006). “§22-3220 (1995); Mont. Code Ann. §§46-14-102 , 46-14-311 (2005); Utah Code Ann.”
Kahler v. Kansas, 140 S. Ct. 1021 (2020). “4 Kahler also asked us to decide whether the Eighth Amendment requires that States make available the moral-incapacity defense. See Pet. for Cert. 18. But that claim is not properly before us.”
State v. Cowan, 861 P.2d 884 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 4× “Evidence of a mental disease or defect is admissible in Montana under § 46-14-102, MCA, to prove that a criminal defendant did or did not have a state of mind that is an element of a charged offense.”
State v. Stringer, 897 P.2d 1063 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 2× “At trial, Dannels sought to introduce evidence concerning the battered woman syndrome to explain why she lied to the police about the origin of her bruises. This Court acknowledged that such evidence could be used to prove that the defendant did not have the requisite state of…”
Show all 24 citing cases →
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.