## Facts

- Ryan James Eff, a U.S. Forest Service firefighter assigned to the Davy Crockett National Forest, was investigated after numerous intentionally set forest fires occurred in the area.
- A Forest Service agent installed a GPS data logger on Eff’s government vehicle; the data placed the vehicle at the points of origin of three later fires.
- Eff ultimately confessed to setting approximately fifteen to twenty fires, stating he acted from anger about lack of advancement, to gain firefighting experience to qualify for promotion, and to obtain extra compensation.
- The government charged Eff with three counts of arson involving federal property under 18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1) and (2).
- Eff gave notice of an insanity defense and sought to introduce expert testimony that he had Klinefelter’s Syndrome and that it affected his ability to appreciate the nature, quality, or wrongfulness of his conduct.
- After a Daubert hearing, the district court excluded the expert testimony and refused to provide an insanity instruction.
- Eff waived a jury trial and proceeded on stipulated facts, disputing only whether the fires created a substantial risk of injury to firefighters; the court convicted him on all counts and sentenced him to 84 months.

## Issues

1. Whether Eff’s proffered expert evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to him, was sufficient to require an insanity instruction under 18 U.S.C. § 17 (clear and convincing proof that a severe mental disease or defect made him unable to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of his acts).
2. Whether exclusion of the experts’ testimony and denial of the insanity instruction warranted reversal where the proffer did not satisfy the threshold showing for submitting insanity to the factfinder.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed.
- Even assuming the expert testimony were admitted and credited, Eff’s showing did not permit a reasonable jury to find by clear and convincing evidence that he was legally insane under 18 U.S.C. § 17.
- Because the proffer was insufficient to warrant an insanity instruction, any error in excluding the expert testimony did not justify reversal.

## Legal Principles

- Under 18 U.S.C. § 17, insanity requires proof that, due to a severe mental disease or defect, the defendant was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts; the defendant bears the burden by clear and convincing evidence.
- A trial court must submit an insanity defense only if the evidence, taken most favorably to the defendant, would allow a reasonable jury to find insanity with convincing clarity.
- Evidence suggesting impaired judgment, impulsivity, or other behavioral difficulties does not satisfy § 17 unless it supports the statutory requirement of inability (not merely reduced capacity) to appreciate wrongfulness at the time of the offense.
- A defendant’s goal-directed motives and statements reflecting awareness of the conduct’s purpose and consequences may weigh strongly against a claim of inability to appreciate wrongfulness.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit held that Eff’s proffered expert testimony tying Klinefelter’s Syndrome to diminished appreciation of wrongfulness did not meet the demanding federal insanity standard, and affirmed his arson convictions because the evidence was insufficient to justify an insanity instruction.


United States v. Eff, 524 F.3d 712 (5th Cir. 2008)