How is "insanity defense" defined in the context of the CCP?

The insanity defense in the context of the CCP is primarily defined as a claim that the defendant was unaware of their actions due to mental illness. This defense centers around the premise that individuals cannot be held criminally responsible for their actions if they were suffering from a severe mental disorder at the time of the offense, which prevented them from understanding the nature of their actions or knowing right from wrong.

This definition aligns with legal standards and psychological assessments regarding criminal responsibility. When a defendant successfully asserts an insanity defense, it indicates that their mental state impaired their ability to comprehend the criminality of their behavior at the time it occurred. Thus, this recognition of mental illness as a mitigating factor directly pertains to the legal framework surrounding criminal responsibility.

Other options do not encapsulate the essence of the insanity defense. For instance, while a temporary mental disturbance might influence behavior, it does not meet the rigorous criteria necessary to prove legal insanity. Similarly, using the insanity defense to seek lesser sentences or claiming coercion by another party pertain to different legal concepts and defenses, failing to capture the distinctive focus on mental illness that defines the insanity defense.