Justifications Flashcards
(14 cards)
Justifications Generally
These defenses exist when the requisite mens rea and actus reus are present—the issue is not a failure of proof, but rather something in addition which may justify that defendant’s actions constituting an affirmative defense and a finding of not guilty.
Justifications act to negate the actus reus.
(Perfect) Self Defense
Right to use force to defend against attack (threat of imminent unlawful force).
Can meet unlawful force with force, and deadly force with deadly force.
Defense is available when it is objectively reasonable to think is necessary (both honest and reasonable under common law).
Common Law Deadly Force Self Defense Elements
- the defendant’s [honest and] “reasonable belief” that (2) the conduct of another poses a threat of death or great bodily harm; and (3) that such harm is “imminent” [immediate]; so that (4) the use of deadly force is “necessary” to protect the defendant
Caveats:
If retreat is required by statute, the actor must retreat if able
Actor can’t be original aggressor; actor must withdraw in a way that is clear to the victim of initial aggression for the actor to regain right of self-defense
Force used must be REASONABLE in the circumstances
MPC Duty to Retreat
Use of deadly force is NOT justifiable if the person KNOWS that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating EXCEPT that the person is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work unless he was the initial aggressor
MPC Aggressor Rule
The right to self-defense may be regained by so far breaking off the struggle that any renewal by the other party can be viewed as a distinct engagement
Escalation Rule (not sure if its common law or MPC or both)
An escalation may mark the beginning of a new engagement
MPC Use of Force in Self Protection
Use of force upon or toward someone is justifiable when the actor BELIEVES that such force is IMMEDIATELY NECESSARY for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion
Only a subjective belief is necessary
Texas Generally
No duty to retreat at all
Just read over it and know that its not very restrictive
Imperfect Self Defense generally
When the defendant committed the killing because of AN HONEST, THOUGH UNREASONABLE BELIEF belief of the imminence of death or serious bodily harm.
Intimate Partner Battering & Its Effects
Evidence of battering can remove the objectively reasonable requirement, which means the defendant would only need to subjectively believe in the imminence of harm and necessity of force to have a perfect self-defense defense.
Defense of a Dwelling
Traditionally required a reasonable belief that an intruder threatened harm to the occupants of a dwelling.
New statutes have nearly eliminated this requirement
An occupant of a dwelling is any person legally inside a dwelling, not just a resident.
Necessity/Choice of Evils Defense Generally
Usually raised as a defense when conduct is justified by the need to avoid a greater evil by engaging in a lesser, but nonetheless prohibited conduct
Under common law only allowed when facing imminent injury with no viable alternative other than violation of the law.
MPC Choice of Evils
Allowed, provided that:
- The harm or evil is greater than the one sought to be prevented by the law defining the crime
- The law does not provide exceptions or defenses dealing with the specific situation and
- The legislative purpose to exclude the claimed justification does not otherwise plainly appear
TPC Necessity
Conduct is justified if:
1. The actor reasonably believes the conduct is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm
2. The desirability and urgency of avoiding the harm clearly outweigh, according to ordinary standards of reasonableness, the harm sought to be prevented by the law proscribing the conduct; AND
3. A legislative purpose to exclude the justification claimed for the conduct does not otherwise plainly appear.
