Defenses Flashcards
Duress
MPC §2.09
- Threat of unlawful force to D or another
- Person of reasonable firmness in situation would have been unable to resist
- Not reckless for being in situation in which threat was faced
- If a negligence offense and D was negligent, duress is unavailable (§2.09(2))
Duress
Takeaway from Williams helped burglary
No duress defense because by borrowing money from criminals, he recklessly put himself into the situation
Necessity
What is the standard test for necessity?
- Reasonable belief that criminal act is being done to prevent a significant evil
- Reasonable belief that there is no adequate alternative to committing the crime
- Harm caused not disproportionately greater than harm avoided
Necessity
Takeaway from Muller the protester
Necessity defense failed bc Muller did not have reasonable belief that action would stop the war
Duress v. Necessity
Source of the harm?
Necessity = natural forces
Duress = 3d party bad actor
(blurred by MPC)
Duress v. Necessity
Source of the idea for the offense?
Necessity = D came up with idea himself
Duress = Someone else told D what to do
Duress v. Necessity
Was crime done to promote general welfare?
Necessity = Yes
Duress = No
Duress v. Necessity
What is the lesser evil/harm?
- Human life is always valued above money and property
- Courts generally resist weighing the value of one life against another
Duress v. Necessity
Common law for intentional homicide
Duress and necessity are not available as defenses to intentional homicides
* Duress or necessity may provide defense against involuntary manslaughter (reckless manslaugher) and negligent homicide
Duress v. Necessity
MPC for intentional homicide
Duress and necessity are generally applicable (even in cases where D is charged with murder)
Self-Defense
Takeaway from Biggs
Court held that elements of self-defense are
1. A reasonable belief that use of force was necessary to defend self against immediate use of unlawful force
2. Use of no more force than reasonably necessary in the circumstances
Self-Defense
Takeaway from Dykes - use this test to determine if self-defense can be used
Use this test when figuring out when to use
1. Reasonable grounds of imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm
2. Actual belief in danger
3. Cannot be agressor
4. Force used in defense cannot be unreasonable or excessive
Self-Defense
Common law approach to mistake of fact
- Full defense if mistake is reasonable
- Partial defense if mistake is unreasonable - imperfect and reduces to lesser included offense
Self-Defense
MPC approach to mistake of fact
§§3.04(2)(b) and 3.09(2)
1. If mistaken belief is reckless, then can be convicted of manslaughter §210.3(1)(a)
2. If mistaken belief is negligent, then can be convicted under §210.4
Self-Defense
Goetz historical approaches to mistake of fact
NY Penal Law in 1909
* Only available if defense is actually necessary
NY Penal Law in 1965
* Available if you are mistaken - but must be reasonable taking into account experiences, size, strength, etc.
