Defenses

Question 1

Justification

Answer 1

The defendant admits committing the underlying act but asserts that for some reason the act was so socially or morally desirable that it does not fall within the ambit of conduct the criminal law is meant to deter and punish.

See necessity, self-defense, defense of others, and defense of property

Question 2

Excuse

Answer 2

The defendant admits to behavior satisfying the elements of a crime but argues that he should not be held criminally responsible because of some special circumstance.

Includes duress, entrapment, consent, insanity, and incapacity

Question 3

Necessity Elements

Answer 3

(1) the defendant committed the crime to prevent an imminent and substantial harm, (2) there was no reasonable alternative course of action available to the defendant, and (3) the harm caused was less than the harm avoided.

Question 4

Necessity Rules

Answer 4

Actor faced with a clear & imminent danger. Source of harm needs to be natural emergency as opposed to human forces.

Actor must reasonably expect that the action will be effective in abating the danger sought to be avoided. Can only protect persons and property not financial interests.

Harm the actor will cause by breaking the law must be less serious than the harm avoided. Weigh against the harm reasonably foreseeable at the time, rather than the harm that actually occurs.

Actor must have “clean hands.”

Question 5

Clean Hands

Answer 5

Defendant should not have substantially contributed to the emergency or put herself in a situation where she would be forced to engage in a criminal conduct

Question 6

Self-Defense

Answer 6

A non-aggressor may use force in self-defense if (1) he actually and reasonably believes (2) that the force is necessary (3) to protect himself from the imminent use of unlawful force by another.

Question 7

SD Deadly force

Answer 7

only justified in self-protection if the actor reasonably believes that its use is necessary to prevent imminent and unlawful use of deadly force by the aggressor.

Question 8

SD Reasonable belief

Answer 8

Most jdx: a defendant must reasonably believe that the use of force is necessary to defend against imminent, unlawful force.

First, the defendant must subjectively believe it was necessary to kill to save herself. The focus is on what the defendant perceived when the killing occurred. Second, the defendant’s belief must be objectively reasonable. The focus is on what an ordinary person would have done under the same circumstances.

A reasonable belief can establish the defense even if the belief is incorrect. The minority rule allows the defense even if the defendant unreasonably believed that the use of force was necessary.

Question 9

SD Imminent Use of Unlawful Force

Answer 9

Force is imminent if it is actually occurring or is about to occur without delay. Preemptive strikes are forbidden.

Question 10

SD Proportionate Use of Force

Answer 10

The defendant must use no more force than is reasonably necessary to resist another’s use of unlawful force.

Question 11

SD Duty to Retreat

Answer 11

No duty to retreat ever before using nondeadly force.

Majority Jdx: no duty to retreat ever

Minority jdx: a defendant must retreat before using deadly force if she can retreat with reasonable safety.

Question 12

SD Castle Doctrine

Answer 12

A defendant has no duty to retreat while inside her home or the areas adjacent or connected to it, unless the defendant is deemed the aggressor. (may extend to the workplace).

Question 13

Imperfect Self-Defense

Answer 13

Some jurisdictions treat an unreasonable belief that the use of force was necessary as imperfect self-defense. This does not erase criminal liability but it may mitigate the offense of conviction or the sentence. Usually applies where defendant used deadly force when such extent of force was unreasonable and not proportional.

Question 14

SD Initial Aggressor

Answer 14

An initial aggressor is one who acts so as to create in another person a right of self-defense.

An initial aggressor may not exercise self-defense unless:

The aggressor provokes an altercation using nondeadly force and is met by either the use or imminent threat of deadly force or disproportionate nondeadly force, OR

The aggressor (1) withdraws from conflict in good faith and (2) communicates express or implied notice to the other party of the intent to withdraw.

Key question: who was the aggressor at the time of the deadly injury?

Question 15

Peterson

Answer 15

Peterson pulled out a gun, so victim picked up a blunt object and walked towards him. He shot him. One cannot support a claim of self-defense by a self-generated necessity to kill.

Question 16

Goetz

Answer 16

A determination of reasonableness for SD must be based on the “circumstances” facing a defendant or his “situation.”

Ex. Physical movements of assailant, any relevant knowledge and physical attributes of aggressor, and defendant’s prior experiences

Question 17

Norman

Answer 17

gross abuse case, she kills husband while he is sleeping): imminent for SD typically means immediate danger that will instantly affect the defendant and cannot be protected against by asking for help from law enforcement or others.

Question 18

Defense of Others

Answer 18

A person may use force to protect another if (1) she actually and reasonably believes (2) that the use of force is necessary (3) to protect another person from the imminent use of unlawful force.

Almost same as SD. Jdx split whether reasonable mistake allowed.

Question 19

Defense of Property

Answer 19

A defendant may use nondeadly force to defend property if (1) the force is reasonably necessary to prevent (2) imminent, unlawful interference with (3) real or personal property that is (4) in the defendant’s possession.

A defendant may use no more force than is reasonably necessary to prevent the interference.

Question 20

Hot pursuit doctrine

Answer 20

Once the taking or interference is complete, a defendant generally may not use force to recover the property.

Under the hot pursuit doctrine, the defendant may pursue the taker and use reasonable, nondeadly force to recover the property if the property was just taken and the taker is currently fleeing.

Privilege to use force ends if the taker gets away or the defendant recaptures.

Question 21

DoP and deadly force

Answer 21

A person may not use deadly force to protect property, unless…

a. The interference with property is accompanied by a threat of deadly force to a person, or
b. The person is defending his or her home in specific circumstances

Question 22

Defense of Habitation

Answer 22

Defense of habitation gives a person the right to use lethal force against an intruder when she reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in his or her home.

Defendants do not have a duty to retreat in their own home, but they may not lie in wait outside the dwelling to ambush or attack a would-be assailant.

Question 23

Boyett

Answer 23

in NM, the defense of habitation does not require an intruder to physically enter a home before the owner may use deadly force necessary to prevent the commission of a felony inside the home.

Boyett couldn’t raise defense because there was no evidence to show that Rhodes was trying to gain immediate entry into Boyett’s home or any evidence that she intended to commit a felony once inside.

Question 24

Duress

Answer 24

A defendant will be acquitted of any offense except murder if the criminal act was committed under the following circumstances: (1) Another person threatened to kill or grievously injure the actor or a third party, particularly a close relative, unless the defendant committed the offense; (2) The defendant reasonably believed that the threat was genuine; (3) The threat was present, imminent, and impending at the time of the criminal act; (4) There was no reasonable escape from the threat except through compliance with the coercer’s demands; and (5) The defendant was not at fault for exposing herself to the threat

minority jdx allow imperfect defense