MPC Defenses

Question 1

Deadly force in MPC

Answer 1

Unjustifiable unless the actor believes the force is immediately necessary to protect themselves on the present occasion from: (1) death, (2) serious bodily injury, (3) forcible rape, or (4) kidnapping

Question 2

MPC Self Defense

Answer 2

allows a person to use force on another if he believes that force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the exercise of unlawful force by the other individual on the present occasion

Question 3

MPC Retreat rules

Answer 3

You have to retreat unless in home or business

Question 4

MPC Defense of Others

Answer 4

An intervenor is justified in using force on another person to protect a third party if:
(1) Intervenor uses no more force to protect the third party than that party would be entitled to use in self-defense based on the circumstances the intervenor believes them to be;
NOTE: Subjective beliefs matter, but if the belief was negligent or reckless, a justification defense wouldn’t be available in a prosecution for an offense with a negligent or reckless culpable mental state.
(2) Under the circumstances the intervenor believes to be the case, the third-party would be justified in using such force in their own defense; and
(3) The intervenor believes the intervention is necessary to protect the third party.

Question 5

MPC retreat rules for defense of others

Answer 5

Varies:

• Intervenor who would be required to retreat in self-defense is not required to retreat before using force to protect a third party unless the intervenor knows that the retreat will guarantee the third party’s complete safety.
• Intervenor is required to attempt to secure the third party’s retreat if the third party would be required to retreat, but only if the intervenor knows that the third party can reach complete safety by retreating.
• Neither the intervenor or the third party has an obligation to retreat in the other’s dwelling or workplace to any extent greater than in one’s own dwelling or work place.

Question 6

MPC Necessity

Answer 6

Conduct that the actor believes to be necessary to avoid a harm or evil to himself or to another is justifiable, provided that:

(a) the harm or evil sought to be avoided by such conduct is greater than that sought to be prevented by the law defining the offense charged; and
(b) neither the Code nor other law defining the offense provides exceptions or defenses dealing with the specific situation involved; and
(c) a legislative purpose to exclude the justification claimed does not otherwise plainly appear.
(2) When the actor was reckless or negligent in bringing about the situation requiring a choice of harms or evils or in appraising the necessity for his conduct, the justification afforded by this Section is unavailable in a prosecution for any offense for which recklessness or negligence, as the case may be, suffices to establish culpability.

Question 7

MPC Duress

Answer 7

1) It is an affirmative defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, that a. person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist
(2) The defense provided by this Section is unavailable if the actor recklessly placed himself in a situation in which it was probable that he would be subjected to duress. The defense is also unavailable if he was negligent in placing himself in such a situation, whenever negligence suffices to establish culpability for the offense charged.
(3) It is not a defense that a woman acted on the command of her husband, unless she acted under such coercion as would establish a defense under this Section.
(4) When the conduct of the actor would otherwise be justifiable under Section 3.02 [Necessity], this Section does not preclude such defense.

Question 8

What is matching mens rea