## Facts

- Robert C. DeMoss and Brenda DeMoss divorced in 1986; Brenda worked for Leland Anderson Construction.
- After DeMoss allegedly threatened to kill Brenda and coworkers, Brenda’s employer obtained a restraining order barring DeMoss from harassing her at home or work.
- On July 23, 1986, DeMoss bought a rifle, drove to the construction office, and entered armed with a rifle and loaded magazine while carrying a bottle of cognac.
- DeMoss forced Brenda and a coworker into a bathroom after pulling a telephone from the wall; he later moved Brenda to a break area, spoke about Vietnam, called it “judgment day,” and stated an intent to kill the employer, then Brenda, then himself.
- DeMoss later went with the women to a file room, where he fell asleep or passed out; the women removed the rifle, fled, and called police.
- When police woke DeMoss, he appeared confused and disoriented.
- DeMoss was charged with two counts of kidnapping and one count each of aggravated assault, aggravated burglary, and criminal damage to property.
- At trial, DeMoss asserted insanity, relying primarily on psychiatric testimony that he had PTSD and substance abuse; the psychiatrist attributed DeMoss’s inability to understand reality at the time chiefly to intoxication, with PTSD also contributing.
- The jury convicted DeMoss on all counts.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to give a diminished-capacity instruction based on PTSD evidence.
2. Whether the trial court erred by instructing that temporary insanity caused by voluntary intoxication is not a defense.
3. Whether the voluntary intoxication instruction improperly prevented the jury from considering PTSD evidence.

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the convictions.
- The court held Kansas does not recognize diminished capacity as a separate defense apart from the statutory insanity test, so no diminished-capacity instruction was required.
- The court approved the instruction that temporary insanity produced by voluntary intoxication is not a defense under Kansas law.
- Reading the instructions as a whole, the court concluded they fairly stated the law and did not mislead the jury or foreclose consideration of PTSD within the insanity framework.

## Legal Principles

- Kansas channels mental-disease evidence through its statutory insanity standard and does not recognize a separate diminished-capacity doctrine requiring an additional instruction.
- Temporary insanity resulting from voluntary intoxication does not excuse criminal liability; voluntary intoxication has only limited relevance as defined by statute (such as to negate specific intent where applicable).
- Jury instructions are sufficient when considered as a whole if they fairly state the governing law and do not mislead the jury.

## Conclusion

The court upheld DeMoss’s convictions, ruling that the trial court properly instructed the jury on insanity and intoxication, correctly rejected diminished capacity as a separate theory, and correctly explained that intoxication-induced temporary insanity is not a defense.


State v. DeMoss, 770 P.2d 441 (Kan. 1989)