Defenses Flashcards
Types of defenses for specific intent crimes
Capacity (insanity, intoxication, etc), Justification (self-defense, etc)
Tests for insanity
M’Naghten, Irresistible Impulse, Durham/New Hampshire test, Model Penal Code standard
Elements of M’Naghten test
D suffered from a mental disease or defect in reasoning; D was unable to understand the ‘nature and quality’ of his act OR that what he was doing was wrong
Define Irresistible Impulse test
Looks at whether D is incapable of controlling his behavior. Many states use both M’Naghten & the Irresistible Impulse test.
Define Durham/New Hampshire test
D will be acquitted if his actions were the product of a mental disease or defect (‘but for’)
MPC test for insanity
As a result of mental disease or defect, D lacks substantial capacity to either: Appreciate the criminality of his conduct; or Conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. Success under either the M’Naghten test or Irresistible Impulse test will satisfy the MPC standard.
Justification/excuse defenses
Argues that D’s conduct was justified under the particular facts of the case. Includes: Self-defense, Defense of others, Defense of property, Necessity, Duress, Crime prevention, arrest and to prevent escape, Entrapment
Elements of self-defense
D honestly and reasonably believed; That he was subject to an imminent unlawful use or threat of force; and D used proportional force to defend himself
When can first aggressors claim self-defense?
They have completely withdrawn, communicated that to V, and V reattacks/continues attacking; or They used nondeadly force and V responded with deadly force
Can V act negligently when using self-defense?
No, V may not act in a manner that a reasonable person would find inappropriate
Define castle doctrine
A person in his or her own home has no duty to retreat from the use of deadly force for protection
When can D invoke a defense of others claim?
If D: Reasonably believed V was in imminent danger of great bodily harm; Used force proportional to prevent the harm; and Reasonably believed V would have had a right of self-defense
When is the defense of property allowed?
Non-deadly force is justified if: D has a reasonable belief that the property is in imminent danger; and D did not use more force than what was necessary to prevent the interference
Can you use deadly force to protect property?
No, unless: Intruder has broken into dwelling (i.e. your occupied home); There is reasonable fear of an imminent felony being committed; and Force is necessary to prevent such intrusion. Modern view: deadly force to protect one’s home is only allowed if D has a fear of an imminent violent felony being committed (e.g. homeowner sees intruder with a gun)
Elements to the defense of necessity
There is an immediate threat of greater harm to persons or property unless D commits the act; No reasonable alternative to breaking the law; and D is not responsible for causing the initial harm. Economic necessity is not valid justification
Elements for duress defense
Imminent threat by third party; Of serious great bodily harm or death; That reasonably causes D to become fearful. Duress is not allowed as a defense for homicide
Is voluntary intoxication a defense?
No, unless used to show that D could not have formed or possessed the requisite intent for a crime (i.e. only for specific intent crimes)
Is involuntary intoxication a defense?
Yes, as either temporary insanity or negation of requisite intent (either general or specific)
What qualifies as involuntary intoxication?
Taking a substance: Under duress; or Without knowledge of its effects (lack of knowledge must be reasonable)
Is consent a valid defense?
Yes, only if: Consent is an element of the crime; or Consent is for non-serious bodily harm that occurs during a lawful athletic activity or competition AND The consent was voluntarily given by a person with legal capacity to consent
Elements of entrapment defense
Government designed the crime and encouraged its commission; and D was not predisposed to commit the crime prior to engagement with law enforcement. Very limited defense that rarely works
Is mistake of law a valid defense?
Generally not. Only successful in extremely rare circumstances if: D reasonably relied on a statute that is invalid; or Crime requires knowledge of the law itself (ex. crime requires D to ‘willfully’ violate it; often applies to complicated tax laws)
Is mistake of fact a valid defense?
Only if the mistake prevented D from having the requisite mens rea for the crime. Mistake can be either reasonable or unreasonable
