Defenses

Question 1

Self-Defense

Answer 1

Self-defense may be used in response to imminent threats of unlawful force.

Question 2

Self-Defense (Non-Deadly Force)

Answer 2

Non-deadly force may be used if D reasonably believes it necessary to protect himself from imminent unlawful force

Question 3

Self-Defense (Deadly Force)

Answer 3

D may use deadly force to protect against an attack that threatens imminent death or great bodily harm.

Question 4

Self-Defense (Retreat)

Answer 4

Under the Majority rule, a D need not retreat before using deadly force, UNLESS the D is the initial aggressor and safe retreat is available. In a minority of jurisdictions, the victim is required to retreat unless they are in their home, or victims of rape or robbery.

Question 5

Self-Defense (Initial Aggressor)

Answer 5

A D cannot assert self defense as a justification unless: 1) the D withdraws, 2) V escalates a minor dispute into a deadly altercation, and 3) safe retreat is unavailable.

Question 6

Imperfect Self-Defense

Answer 6

Some states recognize an imperfect self defense doctrine where a murder may be reduced to manslaughter even though the D was at fault in starting the altercation if he unreasonably but honestly believed in the necessity of responding with deadly force.

Question 7

Defense of others

Answer 7

D has right to defend others if she reasonably believes that the person assisted has the legal right to use force in his own defense

Question 8

Defense of Property

Answer 8

Deadly force may never be used. If D is on the property then deadly force can be used in self-defense.

Question 9

Insanity

Answer 9

Insanity is a defense to all crimes, including strict liability crimes. D carries the burden of proof. – MAID

Question 10

Insanity - M’Naghten Test (Right/wrong test)

Answer 10

at the time of his conduct, as a result of the mental defect the defendant lacked the ability to know the wrongfulness of his actions or understand the nature or quality of his actions

Question 11

Insanity - MPC/ALI Test

Answer 11

D lacked the “substantial” capacity as a result of his mental disease or defect to either (1) appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or (2) to conform his conduct to the requirements of law

Question 12

Insanity - Irresistible Impule

Answer 12

the D, as a result of a mental defect, could not control the impulse to commit the crime

Question 13

Insanity - Durham Rule

Answer 13

was the D’s conduct a “product” of a mental illness (easiest to satisfy)

Question 14

Voluntary Intoxication

Answer 14

(includes addicts and alcoholics) → defense to specific intent crimes (i.e. if crime requires purpose (intent) or knowledge), BUT not a defense to general intent crimes

Question 15

Involuntary Intoxication

Answer 15

(Intoxicant was not knowingly and voluntarily ingested)→ is a defense to all crimes, including the (no intent) crimes of strict liability, once it is established that the intoxication caused the actus reus.

Question 16

Mistake of Fact

Answer 16

1. Reasonable mistake of fact – can disprove any state of mind (but no defense to strict liability crimes)
2. Unreasonable mistake of fact – can disprove specific intent only
3. Factual impossibility is not a defense to attempt. If everything went as the defendant planned (i.e. without the mistake), he would have committed the crime!

Question 17

Mistake of Law

Answer 17

NO defense that D believed her activity would not be a crime, even if that belief was reasonable and based on the advice of an attorney

Question 18

Legal Impossibility

Answer 18

can be a defense to attempt if it negates the intent requirement. Legal impossibility exists when the act the defendant intends to accomplish is not proscribed by criminal law, even though the defendant believes it is illegal.

Question 19

Factual v Legal Impossibility

Answer 19

ask if everything D intended to do was true, would it have been a crime  yes = factual impossibility. No = legal impossibility.

Question 20

Infancy

Answer 20

A. Under the age of 7, there is no criminal liability

B. Under 14 there is a rebuttable presumption of no criminal liability

Question 21

Duress

Answer 21

defense to all crimes EXCEPT criminal homicide (but under certain circumstances can reduce homicide from murder to manslaughter)

Question 22

Entrapment

Answer 22

very limited defense. D has a predisposition to commit the crime, and government induces.

Question 23

Constitutional Challenges (Vagueness)

Answer 23

criminal statute must (1) give fair warning, i.e. person of ordinary intelligence must be able to discern what is prohibited, and (2) no arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement

Question 24

Constitutional Challenges (Double Jeopardy)

Answer 24

prohibits a second trial after the D has been convicted of the “same offense” (or lesser included offense)

1. Does not apply if second crime requires an element which is not an element of the first crime and vice versa.
2. Court can impose multiple punishments at a single trial where the punishments are for two or more statutorily defined offenses specifically intended by legislature to carry separate punishments, even though the offenses arise from the same transaction and constitute the same crime.