## Facts

- Julius Fisher, a janitor at the Washington National Cathedral in the District of Columbia, killed the cathedral librarian following an altercation.
- The government prosecuted Fisher for first-degree murder under D.C. law requiring “deliberation and premeditation.”
- The defense presented evidence that Fisher had below-average intelligence and an aggressive psychopathic personality associated with impulsive behavior.
- It was undisputed that Fisher knew right from wrong and did not satisfy the District’s legal test for insanity.
- Fisher requested a jury instruction permitting consideration of his mental abnormality (short of insanity) when determining whether he formed the deliberation and premeditation required for first-degree murder.
- The trial court refused the requested instruction; the jury convicted Fisher of first-degree murder, and he received a death sentence.
- The D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed; the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

## Issues

1. Whether, in a D.C. first-degree murder prosecution, the trial court must instruct the jury that it may consider mental deficiency or disorder not amounting to legal insanity when deciding deliberation and premeditation and the degree of murder.
2. Whether excluding such “partial responsibility” evidence and instructions violates constitutional or other controlling legal principles.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence.
- The Court held it was not error, under District of Columbia law, to refuse an instruction allowing the jury to use sub-insanity mental-condition evidence to reduce first-degree murder to second-degree murder.
- The Court declined to disturb the local D.C. rule limiting the relevance of mental-condition evidence to the insanity defense, absent exceptional circumstances.
- The Court rejected the claim that the Constitution requires recognition of “partial responsibility” to negate deliberation and premeditation.
- The Court acknowledged it may notice material instructional error in capital cases even without a preserved objection, but found none warranting reversal here.
- Dissents argued the jury should have been permitted to consider Fisher’s mental abnormality as directly relevant to deliberation and premeditation.

## Legal Principles

- A jurisdiction may confine mental-condition evidence to the insanity defense and may exclude evidence of mental deficiency short of insanity offered to negate deliberation and premeditation for first-degree murder.
- The Constitution does not compel a “partial responsibility” doctrine permitting sub-insanity mental impairment to reduce the degree of homicide by negating specific mental elements.
- The Supreme Court will generally defer to District of Columbia local rules of criminal law and evidence and will intervene only in exceptional cases of serious error.
- In capital cases, appellate courts may notice material instructional error affecting life, even if not properly preserved, but reversal still requires a showing of such error.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld a District of Columbia rule treating insanity as the exclusive vehicle for mental-condition mitigation at the guilt stage, permitting exclusion of sub-insanity impairment evidence from the jury’s deliberation on premeditation and deliberation in first-degree murder.


Fisher v. United States, 328 U.S. 463 (1946)