Cases by Name
People v. Armitage (1987)
Defendant, who had been the victim of a prior attempted burglary, rigged a .22 rifle at the garage door to fire if someone attempted to enter. Two teenagers attempted to open the garage and one was shot in the face and killed. Case held that spring guns could not be used to protect home because they are incapable of the discretion required for self-defense to be asserted.
People v. Ceballos (1974)
What is the "Actual Cause Theory" described by the MPC
"But for" something happening, the outcome would not had happened. Looks at the defendant's intent and whether the harm was anticipated.
A reasonable belief that you will be harmed immediately, the danger must be present and urgent.
What is Imminent Threat
Define Malice/Maliciousness
Person intentionally or recklessly causing harm
Regina v. Cunningham (1957)
Person broke off and stole a gas meter from inside a building. Gas leaked and injured the person upstairs. Intent was to steal, not harm anybody. Conviction reversed because malicious is more than just wicked intent, behavior needed to be reckless and the person needed to have known of the danger and ignored it.
Defendants caught on air force base after having been previously escorted off in order to protest war based on religious beliefs. The crime they were charged with was a strict liability crime punished by a fine. Supreme court upheld their convictions identifying the key factors that support strict liability crimes.
Holdridge v. United States (1960)
List and describe the two types of Intervening Acts
Coincidental/Independent: Intervening act is unforeseeable
Responsive: Victim responds to a criminal act in a certain way
Define a Justification Defense
The acts are justified under the law and society does not hold them liable.
A defense which focuses on the defendant and not the act. The act is not socially accepted and society still frowns upon is but the actor may not be blameworthy.
What is an Excuse Defense
People v. Goetz (1986)
A white, previously mugging victim, defendant, when asked for money on the NY subway by five black teens, shot and killed two because he believed they were about to mug him even though they did not have weapons. Case used as an example for subjective standards on reasonable belief of the non-aggressor.
Officers responded to a burglary at a residence. Officer on scene saw one unarmed teenager fleeing who then attempted to climb a fence to escape. Officer shot the teen in the back of the head, killing the suspect. Supreme court held deadly force violated the 4th amendment and ruled it unconstitutional to shoot an unarmed fleeing felon.
Tennessee v. Garner (1985)
When does the MPC authorize deadly force?
(3 answers)
When the force is necessary to protect themselves from:
1. Serious Bodily Injury
2. Forcible Rape
3. Or Kidnapping
Describe the Castle Doctrine
One does not need to retreat if they are threatened in their home to assert self defense and they are authorized to kill to protect home and family.
Define Mistake of Fact v. Mistake of Law
Mistake of Fact refers to a mistake in an element of the crime, i.e, accidentally stole a jacket, whereas Mistake of Law comes from the misunderstanding of statute, typically by self-teaching or poor advice.
State v. Wanrow (1977)
Ms. Wanrow, on crutches with a broken leg, shot and killed an intoxicated large man in her home. She suspected him of molesting her son and neighbor and argument ensued. She was 5’2”. Trial Court argued that acts and circumstances should only be considered at or immediately before the killing. Washington supreme court reversed saying Self-Defense should be considered in light of all the circumstances known to the defendant including things that occurred before the killing!
Defendants charged with violating the Federal Narcotic Act by selling opium without an order form from IRS. Defense argued they did not have "knowledge" that their product contained Opium. Supreme court upheld statute claiming that regulatory offenses and the legislature could omit a knowledge element for public safety, especially as it only resulted in a fine.
U.S. v. Balint (1922)
When does the MPC not permit the use of deadly force?
(3 Answers)
1. If you are the aggressor
2. If you can safely retreat
3. If it is enacted in protecting loss of property
What is the difference between General and Specific Intent?
General Intent: Less Blameworthy, requires a blameworthy state of mind such as negligence or knowingly
Specific Intent: More Culpable, requires proof of a specific mental state and is usually an element of an offense. Typically requires proof of person's objective when committing act.
List 4 out of 6 characteristics of a defendant that could be considered when looking at a self-defense claim.
Physical characteristics of victim and defendant
Prior knowledge/reputation of the victim
Prior experiences with the victim
Prior threats from the victim
Prior victimization by the victim
Prior victimization of the defendant – Goetz
State v. Ellis (1902)
In asserting self-defense, the defendant wanted to introduce into evidence that the "victim" had a habit of carrying weapons on him and using them in arguments. Evidence was denied. State supreme court reversed conviction because the information went to the reasonableness of the defendant's motive and state of mind for defense.
U.S. v. Hamilton (1960)
When can an aggressor claim self defense?
1. If they withdraw in good faith and
2. They make this known to the other party
3. If the "victim" escalates the altercation in a disproportionate manner
What is the Transferred Intent Doctrine?
A general rule that applies to police officers who, in enacting lawful deadly force, accidentally miss their target and kill an innocent bystander. Only when an officer's actions are considered reckless is an exception made.
What is the difference between Criminal and Civil Negligence?
Criminal negligence: Needs to show a major deviation from standard of care - reasonable prudent person (Gross Deviation; maybe you didn't intend your actions but because it was such a great deviation, you should be held liable)
Civil Negligence: Did not take the care of a reasonable prudent person.
State v. Wickliff (2005)
Bail bondsman in NJ attempted to apprehend a fugitive. He believed he had the legal right to enter a house to look for a fugitive and pushed through the home's door. Relied on contract and case law about bondsman. Charged with trespass. Classic Mistake of law and negation of an element of the offense.
Defendant went hunting near a military bombing range in Michigan with posted Trespass signs. The defendant ended up taking some piled up bomb casings believing they were garbage and abandoned. Judge would not allow his defense, Supreme court reversed this conviction however. Since he was charged with Federal Embezzlement, his defense negating the knowledge element of the crime should have been allowed.
Morissette v. United States (1952)
What are the 3 common factors of Self Defense?
1. Must be the non-aggressor
2. Imminent Force/Necessity Component
3. Proportional Force
What fact about a self-defense claim creates an Imperfect Self-Defense?
When the Defendant had an honest but unreasonable belief that the force was necessary
List the 3 exceptions to the Mode Penal Code's Rejection of Mistake of Law Defenses.
1. Reasonable Reliance Doctrine: Rely on erroneous statement of law found in statute, judicial determination or official statement
2. Fair Notice: Conduct not illegal and law not known
3. Negates Mens Rea: Can be a defense if it negates a material element (or different law)
Regina v. Prince (1875)
Prince took a 14-year-old girl from her father believing she was 18 years old. Law prohibited taking an unmarried girl under 16 out of the possession of her father without his consent. Jury believed prince reasonably believed the girl was 18 years old. Court determined crime was strict liability, resulting in conviction.
Defendant was convicted of forgery in the state. City ordinance required all felons to register if staying in the city for more than 5 days. Defendant was arrested and convicted for failing to register. Tried to argue she didn't know of local ordinance but was denied. Supreme court reversed due to 14th amendment violation by failing to notify the person that their behavior was illegal.
Lambert v. California
What are the 3 Legal Theories Behind Excuse Defenses? Give a brief description for each.
Deterrence Theory: Punishing a person in that circumstance would not deter them in the future; i.e., Coercion/duress Mentally ill/insane
Causation Theory: Criminal Act was caused by factors out of defendant’s control
Character Theory: Person was a good moral person but committed act out of necessity
List the 4 Different States of Mind
1. Intentional: Person desired or purposely caused the harm knowing the harm would result from their act.
2. Knowingly: Aware of or believing the fact exists or being willfully blind.
3. Willfully: Usually synonymous with Intentional, act done with "evil purpose" or certain motive
4. Negligently: Deviating from the standard care of a Reasonable Person. Taking an unjustifiable risk of causing harm to others.
List the 4 Theories Behind Justification Defenses and provide a brief description for each.
1. Public Benefit: Society is better off without
2. Moral Forfeiture: Aggressor forfeits right to life
3. Moral Rights: Defendant has a right to protect his or her life and moral interest
4. Superior Interest: Weighing the good and the bad, harmed caused is better than the potential harm avoided, i.e., crashing into a toll both v. head on collision