{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Justification Defenses outline

Justification Defenses outline - DEFENSES TO CRIMINAL...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
DEFENSES TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY - OUTLINE I. Objectives for Section on Defenses - Chaps. 7 & 8 - Know the difference between general and affirmative defenses, including impact on production of evidence and burden of proof - Know definitions of justification and excuse defenses & differences between the two types - Know the types of justification defenses and excuse defenses - Know the elements of & be able to apply (to fact situations) the following defenses: self-defense, choice-of-evils, consent, duress, mistake, intoxication, age, and entrapment - Know and be able to apply the retreat doctrine and the defense of home and property rule - Know the issues and current law regarding the execution of public duties, resisting unlawful arrest, intoxication and age defenses - Know the limitations of the defense of consent - Know and be able to apply the four insanity tests - Understand the reasons for the insanity defense and the current state of the law - Understand and be able to apply the diminished capacity defense(s) II. Introduction to defenses - General Principles A. Distinction between A general @ defenses & affirmative defenses 1. A General @ defenses - theories of A defense @ that negate the prosecution = s attempt to prove the elements of the offense charged All require production of evidence by defendant, but not affirmative defense, so no shifting of persuasive burden Note - Constitutional requirement that govt. prove each element of crime Alibi defense belongs in general defense category 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
2. Affirmative defenses - those defenses that say - even though prosecution has established elements of the crime, for some other reason, not liable or reduced liability recognized by law Justification & excuse defenses, such as self defense, insanity, entrapment, etc., are affirmative defenses to variety of crimes Patterson v. New York - U.S. Supreme Court (1977) approved shifting burden of persuasion to defendant on issues that not an element of crime charged B. How Affirmative defenses work - burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt on prosecution for each & every element of crime charged - where a defense outside basic elements of crime, A extraordinary circumstances @ - defendant has burden of production for affirmative defense in all jurisdictions - jurisdictions vary with burden of persuasion Some - burden always on prosecution - i.e., where evidence of affirmative defense presented, burden on prosecution to prove not valid some - burden on defendant to prove affirmative defense by preponderance of evidence A few jurisdictions - once defendant proves affirmative defense by preponderance of evidence, burden shifts back to prosecution to prove NOT justified or excused beyond a reasonable doubt C. Difference between defenses of justification and excuse Justification - although defendant admits did action and would generally be a crime,
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 7

Justification Defenses outline - DEFENSES TO CRIMINAL...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online