Defenses Flashcards
(33 cards)
Under the capcity defense of insanity, what is the M’Naughten Test?
- Defendant must have a mental disease or defect
- Defendent did not know his act was wrong, OR
- did not understand the nature of his act.
The oldest test.
Under the capcity defense of insanity, what is the Irresistible Impulse Test?
Defendant must have a mental disease or defect (usually added to the M’Naughten test): If the defendant either:
(a) was unable to control his actions, OR
(b) was unable to conform his conduct to the law.
Under the capcity defense of insanity, what is the Product Test?
Defendant must have a mental disease or defect.
Crime was the product of mental illness.
Under the capcity defense of insanity, what is the Model Penal Code (MPC) Test?
Defendant must have a mental disease or defect (combines the first two common law tests): If the defendant lacked the substantial capacity to either:
(a) appreciate the criminality of his conduct
OR
(b) conform his conduct to the law
In VA, what is the test for the defense of insanity? What else is required for a defendant to raise the defense of insanity? Who has the burden of proof?
The Test: In Virginia, the defendant may choose to use either of the following tests:
(a) M’Naughten Test
OR
(b) Irresistible Impulse Test
Notice to the State: The defendant must give the Commonwealth’s attorney written notice at least 60 days prior to trial that it is defendant’s intent to raise insanity defense.
The Burden of Proof: The defense has the burden of proving to the satisfaction of the jury that the defendant was insane.
What is the difference between insanity and incompetency?
For insanity, the issue is whether D was insane at the time of the crime. If yes, then D is not guilty.
For incompetency, the issue is whether D is insane at the time of trial. If yes, then the trial is adjorned until D is competent.
What is the rule regarding involunatry intoxication?
Can be a defense to any crime. Treated like a mental illness, so apply insanity tests. Intoxication must be completely involuntary.
What is the rule regarding voluntary intoxication under the common law?
Can be a defense to specific intent crimes, if the intoxication prevents the defendant from forming the specific intent.
Cannot be a defense to malice, general intent, or strict liability crimes.
What is the rule regarding the defense of voluntary intoxication under Virginia law?
- Is NOT a defense, even for specific intent crimes, unless it has produced permanent insanity.
-
May prevent premeditation. Defense to the crimes of 1st degree murder or capital murder if a person is so greatly intoxicated as to be unable to deliberate and premeditate.
- Exception-to-Exception: Mere intoxication from drugs or alcohol is not sufficient by itself to negate premeditation.
What is the common law rule for the defense of infancy?
1) If the age is less than 7: Prosecution not allowed.
2) If the age is less than 14: Rebuttable presumption against prosecution.
3) If the age is greater or equal to 14: Prosecution allowed.
In Virginia, what is the rule for the defense of infancy?
1) If the age is less than 7: Assumed incapable of forming intent to commit crime.
2) If the age is less than 14: Rebuttable Presumption of incapacity, but the presumption grows weaker as child grows older.
3) If the age is greater than or equal to 14: There is a presumption of capacity. They may be tried as an adult if charged with an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult.
What is the rule regarding the use of nondeadly force in self-defense?
A defendant may use nondeadly force in self-defense if it is:
1) reasonably necessary
2) to protect against an imminent use
3) of unlawful force against himself.
What is the rule regarding the use of deadly force in self-defense?
A defendant may use deadly force in self-defense, if he is facing an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
In regards to the use of deadly force, what is the aggressor rule?
A defendant may not use deadly force if he is the intial aggressor (i.e., the person who started the fight).
But, an aggressor may “regain” his right to use deadly self-defense if –
(a) the aggressor withdraws from the fight and
* communicates* that withdrawal to the other person, OR
(b) the victim suddenly escalates a nondeadly fight into a deadly fight.
In regards to the use of deadly force, what is the retreat rule? What is the majority and minority rules?
In some states, a defendant is required to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense.
1) Majority Rule: Retreat is NOT required.
2) Minority Rule: Retreat is required, unless:
(a) D cannot retreat in complete safety, or
(b) D is in his home (the “castle exception”)
(c) D is making a lawful arrest, or
(d) D is in the process of being robbed.
In Virginia, what is the rule regarding the use of nondeadly force in self-defense?
Defendant may use physical force to defend himself if there is a reasonable appearance that the use of force is justified.
(a) “Reasonable Appearance”: Determined from the subjective viewpoint of the defendant at the time he acted.
(b) Note: There is no duty to retreat, and the force used must be reasonable under the circumstances.
In Virginia, what is the rule regarding the use of deadly force in self-defense?
Person claiming self-defense must be without fault and show an imminent danger of death or great bodily injury.
If used in self-defense to a threat, there must be a present danger of death or great bodily injury – words alone are insufficient, and the fear of life and safety must be reasonable.
In Virginia, must an individual retreat before using deadly force in self-defense? Are there any exceptions?
Retreat is NOT required before using deadly force when confronted with an aggressor.
1) Exception: Where defendant has been at fault or provoked the aggressor, he must retreat as far as safely possible before using deadly force.
2) Own Premises: On one’s own premises, there is no duty to retreat, but use of force must be reasonably calculated to repel the intruder (deadly force allowed).
In Virginia, what is the rule regarding the right of the aggressor to use force in self-defense?
The right of the aggressor to use force in self-defense may be regained after total abandonment of the original attack.
What happens if the defendant is mistaken about the need to use self-defense?
(1) Reasonable mistake: then can still claim self-defense
(2) Unreasonable mistake:
* Common Law Rule: NO self-defense
* Minority/MPC Rule: Imperfect self-defense. An intentional killing, based on an unreasonable belief in the need to use self-defense will be voluntary manslaughter, not murder.
What is the rule regarding the use of force to prevent a crime?
1) Nondeadly force may be used if necessary to prevent a crime.
2) Deadly force may only be used to prevent a felony risking human life.
What is the majority rule regarding the defense of others?
A defendant may use force and deadly force to protect
others if he reasonably believes that the person he is assisting has a legal right to use force.
What is the Virginia (and Minority) rule regarding the defense of others?
Defendant **“steps into the shoes” **of the person he defends (therefore no defense if person defending had no
legal right to use force in self-defense).
What is the rule regarding the use of nondeadly force in defense of a dwelling?
A person is justified in using nondeadly force when she reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent or terminate another’s unlawful entry.
