Defenses to crimes

Question 1

What are the four theories of insanity?

Answer 1

1. M’Naghten (Cognitive Test)
2. Irresistible Impulse (Volitional Test)
3. Durham Test (Causation Test
4. American Law Institute (ALI) or Model Penal Code Test

Question 2

Elements: M’Naghten defense

Answer 2

A defect of the mind that doesn’t allow defendant to understand the wrongfulness of his actions (doesn’t understand right from wrong) (Mc’Naughty Test)

Question 3

Elements: Irresistible Impulse Test

Answer 3

Becuase of disease of mind can’t exercise self control or conform his actions to the requirements of the law (e.g., lacks the capacity for self-control and free will)

Question 4

Elements: Durham Test

Answer 4

But for test- defendant not guilty if the crime was the product of a mental disease or defect
mental disease must be the actual cause of the criminal

Question 5

Elements: American Law Institute (ALI) or Model Penal Code Test

Answer 5

Must show that because of mental disease or defect he lacked the substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conforn his conduct to the requirements of the law
Basically a blend of M’Naghten and Irresistible Impulse Test

Question 6

Defense: Voluntary Intoxication

Answer 6

Can be a defense to specific intent crimes- if defendant can’t develop the requisite state of mind
Not a defense to general intent crimes

Question 7

Defense: Involuntary intoxication

Answer 7

Complete defense to all crimes
e.g., duress, tricked into getting drunk, prescriptions by doctor

Question 8

Defenses: Infancy

Answer 8

At common law no criminal liability for children under 7
Under 14 there’s a rebuttable presumption of no criminal liability

Question 9

Defenses: Self Defense- Non Deadly force

Answer 9

A non-aggressor (innocent) victim may use non-deadly force in self defense when he reasonably believes that force will be used against him

“Clean hands theory” victim must be non-aggressor

Question 10

Defenses: Self Defense- Deadly force

Answer 10

A victim can use deadly force if he is non-aggressor victim, confronted with unlawful force, and he reasonably believes” he is facing imminent threat of death or severe bodily harm

1. Without fault- non-aggressor victim
2. Confronted with unlawful force
3. Reasonbly believes he’s about to die or be severely injured

Majority- No duty to retreat
Minority- duty to retreat if can do so safely unless in home or police making lawful arrest

Question 11

Defenses: Self Defense- Initial Aggresor’s Right to Self Defense

Answer 11

General rule is you can’t use self defense if you provoke the conflict

Words are never initial aggression or provocation
Descriptive language can be adequate provokation (e.g., “I killed your wife and daughter,” “I fucked your wife”

Exceptions:
* If initial aggresor tries to get away and communicates that to the victim, he can use self defense if the victim keeps coming
* If victim escalates fight from non-deadly force to using deadly force, he can use deadly force, but only if he can’t get away safely before doing it.

Question 12

Defenses: Self Defense- Imperfect Self Defense Doctrine

Answer 12

Unreasonable self defense is a defense available if you engage in good faith unreasonable self-defense using deadly force. It’s a mitigating defense and can reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter

Question 13

Defenses: Self Defense: Defense of Others

Answer 13

Can use force that is excessive
Majority View- Honest & Reasonable Belief- even if other person didn’t have a legal right to use self defense you won’t be liable if you reasonably believe he could use force in his own defense
Minority View- Alter ego- you can only help if the person you’re helping would have had the legal right to help himself

Question 14

Defenses: Self Defense- Defense of Dwelling

Answer 14

Can’t use deadly force to defend dwelling unless:
Riotous & Forcible Entry- can use deadly force if they break in and a warning doesn’t make them leave
Intent to commit felony inside or personal danger- you cna kill them if they’re in your house to rob you or hurt you

Modern view- combined the two prongs so that deadly force can only be used when the intrusion appears to pose a danger of a violent felony (e.g., burglar appears to be armed or otherwise dangerous to the residents)

Question 15

Defenses: Self Defense- Defense of Property

Answer 15

Deadly Force Prohibited in defense of property
Non- Deadly Force allowed in two situations:
Defending possession- Use of force appears reasonably imminent
Regaining possession- Immediate pursuit

Question 16

Defenses: Adequate Provocation (aka heat of passion)

Answer 16

Heat of passion is a mitigating defense that lowers murder to manslaughter

Question 17

Defenses: Duress

Answer 17

Defendant reasonably believes another would imminently inflict death or great bodily harm to him or an immediate family member

• Complete defense to all crimes except Homicide

Question 18

Defenses: Necessity

Answer 18

• Defendant Reasonably believes crime is lesser of two evils- objective test given of defendant at time he acted
• No reasonable alternative

NO DEFENSE TO HOMICIDE
NOt available if defendant is the one at fault- you can’t create the necessity

Necessity vs Duress
- Necessity = threats from natural or physical forces
- ex. Defendant escapes from prison that is on fire. Defendant is guilty of substantive crime of escape, but necessity would be a defense because he will die in fire
- Duress = threats from another person

Question 19

Defenses: Mistake of Fact

Answer 19

• Unreasonable Mistake of fact
  
  • specific intent crimes = yes - can’t develop necessary intent
  • general intent crimes = no
  • strict liability crimes = no
• Reasonable Mistake of Fact
  
  • specific intent crimes = yes
  • general intent crimes = yes- If it’s reasonable mistake they will let you slide
  • Strict liability crimes = no

Question 20

Defenses: Mistake of Law

Answer 20

Mistake of Law is Never a defense

Question 21

Defenses: Lawfully resisting arrest

Answer 21

A person can resist arrest if an officer clearly doesn’t have a lawful basis to make the arrest
Doesn’t extend to people watching

Question 22

Defenses: Entrapment

Answer 22

Defendant must establish that he had no predisposition to commit the crime

Did the cops originate the designs for the crime and implant it in the mind of an innocent person and induce it’s commission?

Question 23

Defenses: Consent

Answer 23

Not a defense unless lack of consent is an element of the crime (e.g., battery and rape)