Defenses

Defenses to Crimes For a criminal conviction to occur, the prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed each element of the alleged crime and had the required intent The defendant is not required to present a defense, but can instead simply force the government to prove its case However, a number of possible defenses are available to defendants in criminal cases

There Was No Crime! The defendant may present evidence to show that 1) no criminal act was committed e.g. a defendant in a rape case might attempt to show that s/he did not commit rape because the alleged victim had consented 2) there was no criminal intent e.g. a defendant in a larceny case may attempt to show that he thought that the coat he took when leaving a restaurant was his

Someone Else Did It! In cases when there is no doubt that a crime was committed, the defendant may present evidence of a mistaken identity or offer an alibi – evidence that the defendant was somewhere else at the time the crime was committed Scientific developments have made it possible to use DNA evidence to connect an offender to a crime Even if the offender doesn’t leave fingerprints at a crime scene, s/he may leave biological evidence – e.g. a single hair – at the scene While the state can use DNA evidence to implicate the defendant, the defendant can also use DNA evidence to prove that s/he did NOT commit the crime Many people convicted of crimes have used DNA evidence to exonerate themselves and be set free

The Act Was Justified! Sometimes an otherwise criminal act may be considered excusable or justifiable The law recognizes the right of a person who is unlawfully attacked to use reasonable force in self-defense or in defense of someone else This may include deadly force if the person reasonably fears death or serious bodily injury A person cannot use more force than appears to be necessary, however If, after stopping an attacker, the defender continues to use force, the roles reverse, and the defender can no longer claim self-defense

On your own…. Take a minute to read the following scenario. Be prepared to answer the question. Mrs. Tetrick sleeps with a handgun under her pillow for protection against intruders. Late one night she heard a noise in the living room and went to investigate. Upon entering the room, she saw a man stealing her collection of Jane Austen novels. The burglar, seeing the gun, ran for the window, but Mrs. Tetrick shot and killed him before he could escape. In a trial for manslaughter, Mrs. Tetrick pleaded self-defense. Would you find her guilty? Why or why not?

On your own…. Take a minute to read the following scenario. Be prepared to answer the question. Mr. Cook legally owns a handgun to protect his home against intruders. One night, Yoshi, a 16-year-old Japanese exchange student, walks up Mr. Cook’s driveway looking for a party. Yoshi thinks Mr. Cook is hosting the party and begins yelling and waving his arms. Mr. Cook gets scared, retrieves his handgun, and points it at Yoshi while yelling “Freeze!” Yoshi does not understand English and keeps walking towards Mr. Cook. Thinking he is an intruder, Mr. Cook shoots and kills Yoshi at the front steps of his house. Mr. Cook is charged with first degree murder. Does he have a defense?

I Did It…But It Wasn’t My Fault! Some criminal defenses rest on the defendant’s lack of criminal responsibility Although the defendant may acknowledge having committing the crime, s/he may not be considered criminally responsible Examples include: infancy, intoxication, insanity, entrapment, duress, and necessity

Haha, I killed your family Infancy Traditionally, children under age 7 were considered legally incapable of committing a crime Children between 7 and 14 were presumed incapable, but this presumption could be proven wrong Today, many states follow some version of this common law approach Other states simply provide that children under a certain age shall not be tried for their crimes but be turned over to juvenile court Children under the specified age have the defense of infancy Haha, I killed your family

Do Now Answer in your notebook: At a party at a friend’s house in a remote rural area, Billy’s friends hold him down and pour tequila into his mouth against his will. Billy doesn’t drink any other alcohol at the party. Later, Billy’s friend Chuck severely injures himself while attempting to jump off the roof of the house into the backyard pool. Someone calls 911, but the dispatcher tells them it will take at least an hour for an ambulance to arrive. Despite his drunkenness, Billy is by far the most sober person at the party. Billy determines (correctly) that if he doesn’t drive Chuck to the hospital himself, he will die. Billy decides to attempt the drive. On the way, Billy hits another car, injuring the driver. He leaves the scene of the accident and brings Chuck to the hospital. Chuck survives. Later, Billy is charged with felony DUI (driving under the influence and causing injury) and leaving the scene of an accident. The other driver also sues him in civil court for her injuries. In your opinion: 1) Should Billy be convicted of DUI? of leaving the scene of an accident? Explain. 2) Should he be forced to pay for the other driver’s injuries? Explain.

Intoxication Defendants sometimes claim intoxication as a defense – that is, they were so drunk or high on drugs that they didn’t know what they were doing Generally, voluntary intoxication is not a valid defense for a crime However, it may sometimes be a valid defense if the crime requires proof of a specific mental state e.g. Antoinette is charged with assault with intent to kill. She claims she was drunk. If she can prove that she was so drunk that she could not have formed the mens rea to kill, her drunkenness may be a valid defense Antoinette can still be convicted of assault, because specific intent is not required for that crime However, if she had decided to kill the victim before she got drunk enough to work up the nerve to do it, then the intoxication defense won’t hold up

Insanity The insanity defense has a long history in various legal systems The Ancient Greeks and Romans believed that insane people were not responsible for their actions and should not be punished like ordinary criminals Since the 14th Century, English courts have excused offenders who were mentally unable to control their actions The modern insanity standard – which is used in about half of U.S. states (including Arizona) and by the federal government – requires that people who have a mental disorder not be convicted if they do not know what they are doing, OR they do not know the difference between right and wrong The other states hold that an accused person must be acquitted if s/he lacks the “substantial capacity” to understand their actions or to conform their behavior to the law

Insanity During criminal proceedings, the mental state of the accused can be an issue in determining whether the defendant is competent to stand trial the defendant was sane at the time of the criminal act, and the defendant is sane after the trial The insanity defense only applies if the accused was insane at the time of the crime Insanity at the time of the trial may delay the proceedings until the accused is competent to stand trial or can understand what is happening However, insanity during or after the trial does not affect the defendant’s criminal liability

Insanity In most states, there are three possible verdicts: guilty, innocent, or not guilty by reason of insanity In some jurisdictions, the last verdict typically results in an automatic commitment to a psychiatric institution In others, the judge may have discretion to determine what should happen to the defendant Some states have a verdict called “guilty but mentally ill” Defendants convicted under this category can be sent to a psychiatric hospital and then transferred to a prison once they are judged sane

Insanity To prove insanity, the defense must produce evidence of a mental disorder Psychiatrists usually give testimony in these cases Both the defense and the prosecution may have psychiatrists examine the defendant, and the testimonies are often in conflict Whether insanity is a valid defense is up to the trier of fact (the judge or the jury) Four states – Montana, Idaho, Kansas, and Utah – have abolished the insanity defense altogether The insanity defenses is rarely used – only in about 1 percent of cases When it is used, it is rarely successful

Entrapment The entrapment defense applies when the defendant admits to committing a criminal act but claims that he or she was induced or persuaded by a law enforcement officer to commit the crime There is no entrapment when a police officer merely provides the defendant with an opportunity to commit a crime Rather, it must be shown that the defendant would not have committed the crime if not for the inducement of the police officer Entrapment is difficult to prove and cannot be claimed as a defense to crimes involving serious physical injury, e.g. rape or murder

With your tablemate… Take 2 minutes to answer the following: Can entrapment be claimed as a valid defense in any of the following cases? Explain. a. Mary, an undercover police officer masquerading as a prostitute, approaches Edward and tells him that she’ll have sex with him in exchange for $50. Edward hands over the money and is arrested. b. Jan, a drug dealer, offers to sell drugs to Emilio, an undercover police officer disguised as a drug addict. Emilio buys the drugs and Jan is arrested. c. Rashid, an undercover FBI agent, repeatedly offers Sammy a chance to get in on an illegal gambling ring, with the promise that he will win big. After refusing several offers, Sammy, who has no history of gambling but lost his job, finally gives Rashid $200 as a bet. Rashid immediately arrests Sammy.

Do Now Review for the quiz! Be sure you can answer the following: What is felony murder? What is arson? What is larceny? Under what circumstances would taking a car that isn’t yours without permission NOT be considered larceny? Under what circumstances would you be held criminally responsible for possessing property that someone else stole? What is robbery? What is burglary? What is embezzlement? What is extortion? What is forgery What is media piracy?

Review What is felony murder? What is arson? What is larceny? Under what circumstances would taking a car that isn’t yours without permission NOT be considered larceny? Under what circumstances would you be held criminally responsible for possessing property that someone else stole? What is robbery? What is burglary? What is embezzlement? What is extortion? What is forgery What is media piracy?

Review What does mens rea mean in the legal context? What does “strict liability” mean? What is the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor? What is the difference between 1st degree murder and 2nd degree murder? What’s the difference between 2nd degree murder and voluntary manslaughter? What is involuntary manslaughter? What is an accomplice? What is an accessory before the fact? What is an accessory after the fact? What does solicitation mean? What does conspiracy mean? What does attempt mean?

Duress A person acts under duress when s/he does something as a result of coercion or a threat of immediate danger to the life or personal safety of themselves or someone else Under duress, an individual lacks the ability to exercise free will E.g. Someone points a gun at your head and demands that you steal money or be killed. You steal the money. Duress would be a good defense if you were prosecuted for larceny. Duress is never a valid defense to murder

Necessity An individual acts under necessity when s/he is compelled to react to a situation that is unavoidable in order to protect life. e.g. A group of people is left adrift in a life boat so heavy with cargo that it is in danger of sinking. The group throws the cargo overboard to make the lifeboat lighter and more manageable. Here, necessity would be a good defense to a charge of destruction of property. Necessity is never a valid defense to homicide