Explain the Brawner rule and describe how it differs from the M'Naghten rule.

What will be an ideal response?

Answers may vary.A committee of legal scholars in the American Law Institute developed the Model Penal Code, which led to what is now called the Brawner rule. This rule states that a defendant is not responsible for criminal conduct if he, "at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect, [lacks] substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality [wrongfulness] of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law." This standard, or a variation, allows judges and juries to consider whether mentally ill defendants have the capacity to understand the nature of their acts or to behave in a lawful way. As of 2015, it was used in 19 states (US Legal LawDigest, 2016). Federal courts have also adopted the Brawner rule in a drastically altered form.The Brawner test differs from the M'Naghten rule in three substantial respects. First, by using the term appreciate, it incorporates the emotional as well as the cognitive influences on criminal behavior. Second, it does not require that offenders exhibit a total lack of appreciation for the nature of their conduct, but only a lack of "substantial capacity." Finally, it includes both a cognitive element and a volitional element, making defendants' inability to control their actions a sufficient criterion by itself for insanity.