Defenses in Criminal Law PDF

Self-defense: One who reasonably believes there is imminent danger of bodily harm can use reasonable amount of force in self defense. Cannot use more force than necessary to stop the threat. Defender becomes the attacker if he continuous to use force. It is a legal defense that allows a person to...

Self-defense: One who reasonably believes there is imminent danger of bodily harm can use reasonable amount of force in self defense. Cannot use more force than necessary to stop the threat. Defender becomes the attacker if he continuous to use force. It is a legal defense that allows a person to use reasonable force to protect another person from harm. It\'s similar to self-defense, but the person defending is different. The defense of others is based on the idea that a person should not be penalized for using reasonable force to protect another person. The rules for this defense vary by jurisdiction, but generally, the defendant must: Believe that the other person is in immediate danger. Use only as much force as a reasonable person would use in similar circumstances. The defense of property is a legal justification that allows a person to use reasonable force to protect their property from theft, destruction, or trespass. When it can be used: A defendant can use the defense of property if they reasonably believe their property is in immediate danger. (For example, if someone is approaching your car with a key and you tackle them to prevent them from vandalizing it, you could claim defense of property.) What force can be used: Only reasonable, non-deadly force can be used to defend property. Deadly force is never justified to protect property. What cannot be done: A property owner cannot use their ownership of the property as an excuse to assault someone. They also cannot use more force than is reasonably necessary to remove a trespasser. In California, you have the right to defend your property, but the amount of force you can use is more limited than when defending yourself or others. If you are accused of using deadly force in an unjustified circumstance, your attorney may be able to argue imperfect self-defense on your behalf "Stand Your Ground\" Some states give people the right to use deadly force to defend their property against unwarranted intrusion Duress: A legal defense that can be used in criminal cases when someone commits a crime due to an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm. Threat: The threat must be immediate, continuous, and present, and must be of such intensity that a reasonable person would be coerced into committing the crime. The threat can be made by words or actions, such as pointing a gun. Fear: The defendant must have a well-grounded fear that the threat will be carried out. The defendant must believe that the threat is real and that any reasonable person in their situation would believe it too. Escape: The defendant must have no reasonable opportunity to escape the threat other than by committing the crime. Crime: The crime committed must be of lesser magnitude than the harm threatened. Duress is not a valid defense for murder However, in California, it can be used as a defense for any other criminal act. Entrapment is a legal defense that can be used when a law enforcement agent persuades someone to commit a crime they would not have otherwise committed. Entrapment is a valid defense because it\'s considered illegal for government agents to create a criminal design and then induce someone to commit it. Entrapment can occur when police use excessive pressure, fraud, flattery, or threats to compel someone to commit a crime. (For example, a police officer might pose as a prostitute and try to convince someone to pay for sex. If the person agrees to the transaction, they could argue entrapment as a defense because they would not have committed the crime if the police officer hadn\'t persuaded them). In California, the defendant has the burden of proving entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence. They must show that they were induced to commit the crime and lacked predisposition. No entrapment if the police merely provide the opportunity to commit the crime. The defendant must show that he would have not committed the crime had it not been for the inducement of the police. The insanity defense is a legal defense that allows a defendant to claim that they are not responsible for their actions due to a mental illness or defect. Definition: The insanity defense is a legal concept that argues that a defendant was unable to understand the nature of their actions or differentiate right from wrong at the time of the crime. Burden of proof: The defendant has the burden of proving the insanity defense by a preponderance of the evidence. Possible outcome: If the defense is successful, the defendant may be found \"not guilty by reason of insanity\" and committed to a mental health facility. Related defenses: The insanity defense is different from diminished capacity, which is a partial defense that claims the defendant was incapable of forming the intent of the crime. History: The insanity defense has its roots in an English legal treatise from 1581, and the M\'Naghten Rule was codified in British law in the mid-19th century. NECESSITY The criminal defense of necessity, also known as the \"lesser of two evils\" defense, allows a defendant to avoid criminal liability if they can show that they committed a crime to prevent a greater harm. To establish a necessity defense, the defendant must prove They acted to prevent injury to themselves or someone else They had no reasonable alternative They did not create greater danger than the danger avoided They believed that their actions were necessary, and that belief was reasonable They did not cause or substantially contribute to the emergency situation Some examples of the necessity defense include: Destroying property to create a fire break to prevent a fire from spreading Trespassing on land to throw up mounds of earth to prevent water from spreading Driving a friend to the hospital in an impaired state to save their life Driving a bus into a barn to stop it after losing control of the brakes Some states distinguish between responses to natural causes and human crises. For example, parents who steal food to feed their children cannot use necessity as a defense. Intoxication can be a defense in criminal cases if a defendant\'s mental state prevented them from understanding the wrongfulness of their actions. The defense is based on whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary, and the level of intent required for the crime. Voluntary intoxication: This is when a defendant intentionally consumes a substance that they know can intoxicate them. Many states do not allow the voluntary intoxication defense. Involuntary intoxication: This is when a defendant is forced or tricked into consuming a substance that intoxicates them. This can include being given drugs without consent, drinking a spiked drink, or consuming a substance that reacts with a medication. Involuntary intoxication is often a successful defense. Intent: The defense of intoxication depends on whether the crime requires specific or general intent. (For example, if a defendant is charged with theft for taking another person\'s jacket after drinking too much, they can use voluntary intoxication as a defense because theft is a specific intent crime. However, if a defendant is charged with battery for hitting another patron after drinking too much, they cannot use voluntary intoxication as a defense because battery is a general intent crime.) Burden of proof: The burden of proof varies by jurisdiction. In some cases, the defense must prove intoxication, while in others, the prosecution must disprove it. Alibi An alibi is a criminal defense strategy that claims a defendant was somewhere else when a crime occurred and could not have committed it. A successful alibi defense can lead to an acquittal by establishing reasonable doubt in the jury\'s mind. Present evidence: Use evidence like cell phone tower records, surveillance footage, or documentation like credit card receipts or plane tickets. Witnesses: Have witnesses testify to your whereabouts at the time of the crime. The credibility of your witnesses is important. For example, a testimony from a parent or spouse may be considered weak because they are more likely to lie for you. Give written notice: In California, you must give the District Attorney written notice of your alibi defense ahead of time. You must also disclose the evidence and witnesses you intend to present. An alibi defense is different from a true defense like self-defense, where the defendant must prove their innocence. With an alibi defense, the prosecutor must disprove it. Mistake of Fact Mistake of Fact can be a defense to a criminal act if it negates the mental state required to commit the crime. Reasonable mistake: A mistake of fact is usually a defense if it is reasonable and made in good faith. Specific intent: Even an unreasonable mistake of fact may be a defense if it negates a specific intent required for the crime. Strict liability crimes: A mistake of fact is not a defense to strict liability crimes, which do not require intent. (For example, if someone sells alcohol to a minor, they can be guilty even if they reasonably believed the person was of age. Sex with a minor is also a strict liability crime.) A mistake of fact: Is a mistaken belief about a material fact, such as the meaning of a legal term or the identity of someone. Some examples of how a mistake of fact can be used as a defense include: Believing you owned an item or were retrieving it for the rightful owner Believing someone was being attacked and killing the perceived attacker A mistake of fact defense can be used in both misdemeanor and felony cases. INFANCY The infancy defense is a criminal defense that can be used when a defendant is too young to understand the consequences of their actions and be held criminally responsible. Children under seven: Common law holds that children under seven are not criminally liable. Children between seven and fourteen: There is a presumption of incapacity, but the prosecution can rebut this. Children over fourteen: Children over fourteen are presumed to be capable of criminality. The infancy defense is based on the belief that juveniles are too immature to form criminal intent. The primary purpose of juvenile court is rehabilitation, and the goal is to reform the minor before they become an adult. In most states, the infancy defense protects a youthful defendant from criminal prosecution as an adult, but it does not prohibit a juvenile adjudication. DNA evidence can be a powerful tool for criminal defense attorneys to establish a client\'s innocence or challenge the prosecution\'s case: Exonerate the innocent: DNA evidence can conclusively show that the accused\'s DNA does not match the DNA found at the crime scene. This can help establish an alibi or create reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors. Identify the guilty: DNA evidence can be compared to databases of known offenders to help identify the actual perpetrators of crimes. Challenge the prosecution: DNA evidence can be used to challenge the prosecution\'s claims and theories. (For example, defense attorneys can question the collection and testing procedures, or present alternative explanations for the presence of DNA at the crime scene.) Analyze small amounts of DNA: Advances in technology allow for the analysis of even small amounts of DNA, which can open up new avenues for defense attorneys. DNA evidence is considered a cornerstone in criminal investigations and has helped to exonerate wrongfully convicted individuals. STRICT LIABILITY CRIMES Intoxication generally cannot be used as a defense for a strict liability crime because strict liability crimes do not require proof of a guilty mind (mens rea), meaning that even if you were intoxicated and did not intend to commit the crime, you can still be found guilty if you performed the act that constitutes the crime. Strict liability and mens rea: Strict liability crimes do not require the prosecution to prove that the defendant had a criminal intent to commit the crime, so intoxication, which is often used to negate intent, cannot be used as a defense. Voluntary vs. Involuntary Intoxication: Even if involuntary intoxication (being drugged without knowledge) is sometimes considered a defense in certain jurisdictions, it generally cannot be used as a defense against a strict liability crime. Example: If someone accidentally sells alcohol to a minor, even if they were unaware of the minor\'s age due to intoxication, they can still be found guilty of the strict liability crime of selling alcohol to a minor