Defenses Flashcards
(50 cards)
Case-in-Chief Defense
Argues prosecutor failed to prove an element of the offense
- Prosecution has the burden to disprove a case-in-chief defense beyond a reasonable doubt
Affirmative Defenses
Assumes prosecutor has proved the elements of the offense but offers another reason for acquittal
- Defendant has the burden to prove by preponderance of the evidence
- Justification and Excuse defenses
Justification Defenses
Argues that defendant acted appropriately under the circumstances
Excuse Defenses
Argues defendant should not be held responsible for acting badly
Common Law Voluntary Intoxication Availability
- Yes for specific intent
- No for general intent
Specific Intent
Require an intent to do some further harmful act or achieve some further harmful consequence
- Language like “with the intent to” or “for the purpose of”
- Murder
General Intent
All crimes that are not specific intent
- Require only intent to perform the harmful act
- Recklessness crimes
MPC Voluntary Intoxication Available when
Provides an excuse if it negatives an element of the offense
- Case in chief
- Not available for recklessness
Involuntary Intoxication Elements
- Defendant was involuntarily intoxicated and
- Intoxication made defendant temporarily insane
MPC Temporary Insanity
Made defendant unable to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements
Four Circumstances Creating Involuntary Intoxication
- Intoxication was the fault of another (force, fraud, duress)
- Innocent mistake (didn’t know it was an intoxicant and should not have known)
- Defendant unknowingly suffered from psychological or physical condition that made him abnormally susceptible to alcohol
- Unexpected intoxication results from medically prescribed drug
Mistake of Law
General Rule: not an excuse
- Exception: some crimes make knowledge of the law an element of the crime
Common Law Mistake of Fact General Rule
Mistake of fact is a defense if it negates the mens rea of the crime
Common Law Mistake of Fact Unreasonable Mistake
- Specific intent: mistake can be unreasonable and still provide a defense
- General Intent: mistake must be reasonable
Common Law Mistake of Fact Legal Wrong Test
No defense if, under the circumstances as D thought them to be, he was still committing a crime
- can be punished at the level of crime would have committed if he knew the actual facts
MPC Mistake of Fact Rule
Is a defense whenever it negates the mental state element of the crime
MPC Mistake of Fact Reasonableness
Mistake need not be reasonable
MPC Mistake of Fact Legal Wrong Test
No defense if, under the circumstances as the D supposed them to be, D was still committing a crime
- D would be punished for the crime he thought he was committing, convicted for the crime they actually committed
Successful insanity defense leads to
Mental institution instead of prision
Common Law Tests for Insanity
- M’Naughten Test
- Volitional Test
Common Law M’Naughten Test
Extends defense to defendents who were laboring under a defense of reason, from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or, if he did know, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong
- most common
Common Law Volitional Test
Extends defense to defendants who were driven by an irresistible impulse to commit crime
MPC Insanity Test
A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks **substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness **of his conduct or to conform his conduct to requirements of the law
Successful infancy defense leads to
Juvenile court and probably juvenile detention istead of prison
