Defenses

Question 1

Insanity (rule)

Answer 1

Rule: if the D was legally insane at the time of his criminal act, no criminal liability will be imposed.

4 tests: M’Nagten, Irresistible Impulse, MPC, and Durham (or NH rule)

Question 2

M’Naghten Test

Answer 2

1. ) focuses on the D’s reasoning abilities; a D will be relieved of criminal responsibility upon proof that, at time of commission:
   a. ) the D suffered from a severe mental disease or defect; and

b. ) as a result, the D is unable to know either:
* the nature and quality of their act; or
* that what they were doing was wrong (delusional self-defense)

Question 3

Irresistible Impulse Test

Answer 3

The defendant will not be guilty when they had a mental disease that kept them from controlling their conduct

Question 4

MPC test

Answer 4

The D is not responsible for criminal conduct if, at time of such conduct and as a result of a mental disease or defect, they lacked the substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality (wrongfulness) of their conduct or to conform conduct to the requirements of law

Question 5

Durham (or NH) Test

Answer 5

The defendant is not criminally responsible if the unlawful act was the product of a mental disease or defect (i.e., that it would not have been committed “but for” the disease or defect)

Question 6

Intoxication

Answer 6

1. ) Involuntary Intoxication: can be alcohol or narcotics.
   * will be a defense to any crime requiring proof of general or specific intent so long as it negates the requisite mens rea.
2. )Voluntary Intoxication: may be a valid defense for a specific intent crime if it negates the requisite mental state (it may negate a purposeful or knowing mens rea)
   * voluntary intoxication is NOT a defense to general intent crimes and will not negate recklessness, negligence, or strict liability.

Question 7

Duress

Answer 7

1. ) duress excuses criminal conduct where the D reasonably believes that the only way to avoid an unlawful threat of great bodily harm or imminent death is to engage in unlawful conduct
2. ) NOT a defense to murder, unless to excuse the underlying felony in felony murder.

Question 8

Self-Defense

Answer 8

self-defense applies where there is an honest and reasonable judgment that it is necessary to use force to defend against an unlawful, imminent threat of bodily harm.

• D must be the V of the unlawful threat (and not the initial aggressor)
• The D must use proportional force (no more than reasonably necessary) to prevent the imminent harm

Question 9

Homicidal Self-Defense

Answer 9

Deadly force used in self-defense is only permitted in response to an imminent threat of death or grievous bodily harm

• unclean hands: initial aggressor may not claim self-defense
• common law: initial aggressor could regain the right to self-defense only by complete withdrawal perceived by the first victim
• modern law: initial aggressor has the right to self-defense if the first victim responds to the aggression with excessive force.

Question 10

Retreat Rule

Answer 10

Common law: the V of unlawful violence had the duty to retreat before use of deadly force

*even when retreat is still required, it is no required in the D’s own home, car, or office, and is not required if retreat not feasible.

Question 11

Defense of Others

Answer 11

1. ) force is justified when necessary to defend a third party who is facing an unlawful imminent threat of bodily harm
2. ) use of deadly force is only justified when there is a threat of death or grievous bodily harm
3. ) Majority rule: based on the reasonableness of the D’s belief that the third person was being unlawfully attacked
   * if reasonable but mistaken, the D can still claim defense of others.

4.) Minority Rule: the D steps into the shoes of the V being attacked - if the third party was the initial aggressor or failed to retreat when required by law, the D has no defense.

Question 12

Defense of Property

Answer 12

1. ) reasonable, non-deadly force is justified in defending one’s property from theft, destruction, or trespass where:
   a. ) the D has a reasonable belief that their property is in immediate danger; and
   b. ) no greater force than necessary is used.
2. ) deadly force may NEVER be used to defend.

Question 13

Necessity

Answer 13

1. ) the defense of necessity justifies the commission of what is normally a crime when:
   a. ) it is necessary to avoid an immediate threat of greater harm to persons or property;
   b. ) there is no reasonable alternative to breaking the law to avoid the greater harm; and
   c. ) the D is not responsible for causing the harm
2. ) common law: necessity is never a defense to murder, unless raised as a defense to the underlying felony for felony murder
3. ) MPC: can raise the defense for all charges, even homicide, which might result in acquittal if the D kills one person to save lots of lives.