JURY REJECTS INSANITY PLEA IN PURSE-SNATCHER CASE.

Byline: Karen Maeshiro Staff Writer

LANCASTER - A Lancaster man who worked as a minister and car salesman faces about 20 years in prison after a jury that convicted him in a string of purse snatches rejected his claim that he was insane at the time of the crime.

An insanity defense is rarely used; and when it is, it's often associated with more serious charges like murder. But defendants accused of lesser crimes occasionally use it, officials said.

``We don't see that many issues like this going in front of a jury,'' said Deputy District Attorney Robert Sherwood, who prosecuted Grant. ``Usually, you see it in cases involving murder, but not all the time. In my research, it came up in other types of crimes like burglary.''

Nathaniel Grant, 33, was accused of trying to take or of taking women's purses as they entered or left three markets and a Target store July 10, Sherwood said.

Grant was arrested after a sheriff's deputy stopped his car as it was leaving the Albertson's market at Avenue J and 10th Street East. The license plate number on Grant's vehicle matched the plate number taken down by one of the victims, Sherwood said.

Grant pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to the charges. Following a seven-day trial, Grant was convicted last week of one count of robbery, two counts of attempted robbery, and two counts of attempted grand theft. He was acquitted of a sixth count of grand theft, Sherwood said.

The sanity phase of the trial lasted three days, ending Monday when the jury found Grant was sane on each charge after deliberating about an hour, Sherwood said.

Grant was ordered to undergo an evaluation and is scheduled to be sentenced in November, Sherwood said. Grant's attorney, Steffeny Holtz, did not return telephone calls for comment.

During the sanity phase, both sides put on expert witnesses.

A defense witness testified that Grant was insane based on his interview of the defendant, a review of medical records, and statements by witnesses describing the defendant's demeanor at the time of the offenses, Sherwood said.

``Two of the witnesses said he was smiling when he took the purses, one said he was laughing, and another said he 'looked out of it,''' Sherwood said.

The defendant's wife and mother testified as to the defendant's upbringing and difficult childhood and past problems, Sherwood said.

``He had been diagnosed as having a bipolar condition. He had very broad mood swings,'' Sherwood said.

The prosecution put on two expert witnesses, who also reviewed the records and interviewed the defendant and said Grant did not qualify for legal insanity, Sherwood said.

Sherwood had also pointed out that Grant had a prior robbery conviction ``that involved similar activity in 1996. We were trying to show he was sane back then, therefore, it was more likely he was sane in this incident,'' Sherwood said.