The defence you are referring to is "automatism". There are lots of example of illegal acts committed during sleepwalking and similar states - my doctoral thesis was on the sleepwalking defence, and I am currently writing a book on the automatism defence. I have lots of materials I can send you.

PS you have some of the foremost experts in forensic sleepwalking on your doorstep in Minnesota! Mark Mahowald, Carlos Schenck, and Michel Cramer Bornemann.

Greetings from Arizona. I am a forensic psychologist and am director of a RTC [Restoration To Competency] program. In our jurisdiction, i.e. in Arizona, simply not being 'aware' at the time of the incident or not remembering the incident is not an adequate defense. The key question is can the person understand the incident either from first hand observers' comments or from submitted police reports regarding the indicent. By way of example, one can be in a 'dissociative' state at the time of the incident and still be mentally competent to go to trial and be termed 'sane' at the time of the incident.

I remember my first case in 1985 with a Defendant who shot and killed is wife and 5yo daughter [but not the 1 yo son]. He claimed a 'dissociative' state and said that he 'saw myself inside the car shooting them' while he was standing outside the car observering. He was convicted of both murders. The case went up and down the legal/judicial ladder for years. My last contact with the case was upon death penality appeal in 2012.

https://www.cvbugle.com/news/2013/may/10/clarkdale-murderer-milo-stanley-commits-suicide-o/

I'd be happy to address any specific questions you might have,

jbs

here is a legal citation in the Milo Stanley murder case:

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1196389/state-v-stanley/

This was from the Arizona Supreme Court. The case ended up with the 9th Circuit and was sent back to the Arizona District Federal Court.

jbs