What diseases are considered mental disorders in criminal cases?

Criminal psychiatric evaluations need to go to specialized appraisal institutions, and they are provincial-level appraisal institutions.

Determine whether the perpetrator has the capacity for criminal responsibility and civil conduct, and judge whether or not they have the capacity for responsibility. The evaluation of mental illness is first of all based on clinical psychiatry, a comprehensive examination and analysis, to determine whether there is mental illness, and at the same time from the perspective of law to determine the mental state and severity of the crime and its causal relationship with the crime, the specific judgment criteria are as follows: First, a person is unable to recognize his own behavior, although a person suffers from mental illness, if he still has the ability to recognize his own behavior, he still has to bear the corresponding criminal responsibility.

The second is the inability to control one's own behavior, that is, although they may have the ability to recognize, they have lost the ability to control, and their behavior can no longer be dominated and controlled by subjective consciousness. Third, they must be in a state where they cannot recognize or control their own behavior at the time of the harmful act. Fourth, if the harmful behavior occurs during the intermittent period of mental illness or during the remission period of the illness, it cannot be assessed as incapable of responsibility because its mental activities have returned to normal.

Fifth, they are in a state of intellectual impairment, that is, they have not completely lost the ability to recognize or control their own behavior, and shall bear criminal responsibility to a certain extent.

Legal analysis: To evaluate his mental state at the time of committing the crime, it is necessary to infer whether his subjective consciousness is normal from a series of objective facts such as his performance at the time of committing the crime, the means of committing the crime, whether the process of committing the crime was logical, and whether his confession after the crime was normal.

Legal basis: Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" Article 18: Where a mentally ill person causes harmful results when he is unable to recognize or control his own behavior, and it is confirmed through legally-prescribed procedures, he does not bear criminal responsibility, but his family or guardian shall be ordered to strictly supervise and receive medical treatment; When necessary, by ** compulsory medical treatment.

An intermittent mentally ill person who commits a crime when he is mentally normal shall bear criminal responsibility.

Where a mentally ill person who has not completely lost the ability to recognize or control his or her own conduct commits a crime, he shall bear criminal responsibility, but the punishment may be mitigated or commuted.

A person who commits a crime while intoxicated shall bear criminal responsibility.

1. Forensic evaluation of mental illness, where the result is that the person being evaluated suffers from mental illness at the time of committing the harmful act, and is unable to recognize or control his or her own behavior due to a serious mental activity disorder, is incapable of criminal responsibility. Then it will not constitute a crime. 2. According to the provisions of the Criminal Law, a completely mentally ill person, that is, a mentally ill person who is unable to recognize or control his own behavior, and commits a harmful act as provided for in the Criminal Law, shall not bear criminal responsibility.

This is because the harmful behavior of a mentally ill person lacks the subjective elements of a crime, and because a mentally ill person does not have the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, judge good and evil, and control his own behavior, he cannot be said to be intentional or negligent in his own behavior, and he has no subjective guilt. 3. China's Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the medical evaluation of a mentally ill person shall be conducted by a hospital designated by the provincial people, and after the evaluator conducts the evaluation, the appraisal conclusion shall be written, signed by the evaluator, and the hospital shall affix its official seal. It also stipulates that if an evaluator intentionally makes a false appraisal, he shall bear legal responsibility.

For mentally ill persons who have been identified through legal procedures as being completely unable to recognize or control their own behavior do not bear criminal responsibility, the Criminal Law stipulates that their family members or guardians shall be ordered to strictly supervise and receive medical treatment, and when necessary, shall be compulsorily.

The procedural regulations on handling administrative cases promulgated by the Ministry of Public Security make it clear that the medical evaluation of mental illness should be conducted by a hospital designated by the provincial people.

1. The person being evaluated. In accordance with this provision, if a mentally ill person commits an illegal act when he is unable to recognize or control his own behavior, he shall not be given administrative punishment, but shall be ordered to be strictly supervised by his guardian. Where intermittent mentally ill persons commit illegal acts when they are mentally normal, they shall be given administrative punishments.

Where mentally ill persons who have not completely lost the capacity to recognize or control their own conduct have illegal conduct, they shall be given administrative punishments, but the administrative punishment may be mitigated or commuted.

2. Appraisal conditions. This procedure also stipulates that if it is necessary to conduct an appraisal of specialized technical issues in an administrative case in order to ascertain the facts of the case, the public security organ shall appoint or hire a person or institution with specialized knowledge to conduct the appraisal. Public security organs shall provide the necessary conditions for evaluations, promptly send original materials such as relevant samples and comparison samples, introduce circumstances related to the evaluation, and clearly state the issues that the evaluation needs to be resolved, but must not imply or compel the evaluators and evaluation bodies to make certain appraisal conclusions.

3. Appraisal fees. In accordance with this provision, where the suspect or victim has objections to the evaluation conclusion, he or she may submit an application for a new evaluation, and a new evaluation is to be conducted after approval by the responsible person at a public security organ at the county level or above. Applications for a new evaluation are limited to one time, and the public security organs shall separately appoint or hire an evaluator or evaluation body.

In accordance with regulations, the public security organs shall bear the cost of the appraisal. If there is a change in the appraisal conclusion, the public security organ shall bear the cost of the appraisal; If the appraisal conclusion is not changed, the appraisal fee shall be borne by the applicant for re-appraisal.

1. Generally, the judicial organ entrusts a professional institution to appraise.

2. If the judicial organ believes that there is no mental illness or is unwilling to evaluate, the family members or lawyers may look for clues or evidence of mental illness, apply for an appraisal or self-evaluation, and may also ask experts to issue expert opinions.

A crime committed by a mentally ill person can constitute a crime.

Mentally ill persons who are unable to recognize or control their own behavior do not bear criminal responsibility if they commit crimes; Where an intermittent mentally ill person commits a crime while he or she is mentally normal, he shall bear criminal responsibility; Where a mentally ill person who has not completely eliminated or recognized his own conduct for committing a crime, he shall bear criminal responsibility, but may be given a lighter or commuted punishment.