Defenses Flashcards
(22 cards)
Tests for insanity
- M’Naghten Rule
- Irresistible Impulse Test
- Durham (or New Hampshire) Test
- A.L.I. or Model Penal Code Test
M’Naghten Rule
a defendant is entitled to acquittal if:
(1) a disease of the mind; (2) caused a defect of reason;
(3) such that the defendant lacked the ability at the time of their actions to either know the wrongfulness of their actions or understand the nature and quality of their actions
Irresistible Impulse Test
a defendant is entitled to acquittal only if, because of a mental illness, they were unable to control their actions or conform their conduct to the law.
Durham (or New Hampshire) Test
only followed in NH
- a defendant is entitled to acquittal if the crime was the product of their mental illness (that is, the crime would not have been committed but for the disease)
A.L.I. or Model Penal Code Test
a defendant is entitled to acquittal if they had a mental disease or defect, and, as a result, they lacked the substantial capacity to either:
(1) appreciate the criminality of their conduct; or
(2) conform their conduct to the requirements of law
Under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, a defendant may not be tried, convicted, or sentenced if, as a result of a mental disease or defect, they are unable….
(1) to understand the nature of the proceedings being brought against them; or
(2) to assist their lawyer in the preparation of their defense
Defense only avail for specific intent crimes:
- voluntary intoxication
When does involuntary intoxication occur?
only if it results from the taking of an intoxicating substance without knowledge of its nature, under direct duress imposed by another, or pursuant to medical advice while unaware of the substance’s intoxicating effect
When can you use nondeadly force?
the person reasonably believes is necessary to protect themself from the imminent use of unlawful force upon themself. There is no duty to retreat.
When can you use deadly force?
A person may use deadly force in self-defense if the person
(1) is without fault;
(2) is confronted with “unlawful force”; and (3) reasonably believes that they are threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm.
The minority view requires retreat before using deadly force if the victim can safely do so, unless:
- The attack occurs in the victim’s own home
- The attack occurs while the victim is making a lawful arrest; or
- The assailant is in the process of robbing the victim
If one is the aggressor in the confrontation, they may use force in defense of themself only if:
- They effectively withdraw from the confrontation and communicate to the other their desire to do so, or
- The victim of the initial aggression suddenly escalates the minor fight into a deadly altercation and the initial aggressor has no chance to withdraw
Majority Rule on defense of others
A defendant has the right to defend others if they reasonably believe that the person assisted has the legal right to use force in their own defense. All that is necessary is the reasonable appearance of the right to use force.
- no special relationship
Minority Rule on defense of others
A defendant has the right to defend others if they reasonably believe that the person assisted has the legal right to use force in their own defense. All that is necessary is the reasonable appearance of the right to use force.
- has to be familial relationship
Deadly/Nondeadly Rule for crime prevention
- Nondeadly force may be used to the extent that it reasonably appears necessary to prevent a felony or serious breach of the peace.
- Deadly force may be used only if it appears reasonably necessary to terminate or prevent a dangerous felony involving risk to human life.
Duress is a defense if:
- person acts under threat of imminent infliction of death or great bodily harm
- belief is reasonable
- threats to third person can suffice
-defense to all crimes except homicide
NECESSITY
the person reasonably believed that commission of the crime was necessary to avoid an imminent and greater injury to society than that involved in the crime.
Mistake or ignorance of fact is relevant to criminal liability only
- if it shows that the defendant lacked the state of mind required for the crime
Reasonable mistake
defense to malice or general intent crime
Any mistake
defense to a specific intent crime
Exceptions to mistake of law not being a defense
(1) the statute proscribing their conduct was not published or made reasonably available prior to the conduct;
(2) there was reasonable reliance on a statute or judicial decision; or
(3) in some jurisdictions, there was reasonable reliance on official interpretation or advice.
Entrapment exists only if:
(1) The criminal design originated with law enforcement officers, and
(2) The defendant was not predisposed to commit the crime prior to contact by the government.
