last minute cram

Involuntary intox only for

i.      Defendant unawareness of what the intoxicating substances is

ii.    Force or duress

iii.   Medically prescribed drugs taken accordingly with prescription

b.     Limits:

i.      Where patient knowingly takes more than prescribed

ii.    Or mixes with alcohol or other controlled substance

MPC VOLUNTARY intoxxication

is a defnese if it negates state of mind

not for strict liability, if there is an intent element,

or recklessness assuming sober person would have known risk

CL insanity

mental disease or defect

didnt know 1)natural or qualiy of actions 2)acts wrongfullness

WI NGI

D had mental diseases or defect

as a result D lacked substantial capacity to 1) appreciate wrongfulness of behavior

2) conform bejavior to requirments’s of law

mistake defense

failure of proof defense

1) honest error about fact or law

2) mistake ot age, existstence of constutionality (strict liability)

entrapment (WI)

1) must prove they were induced by a LEO to commit crime (induced) —> hillshiem (if he was using excessive inciting, urging, persuasion or temptation

2) D had prior disposition to crime

MPC Entrapment

i.      If a law enforcement officer induces or encourages an offense by

·  Making knowingly falser representations designed to induce the belief that such conduct is not prohibited

·  Employing methods of persuasion or inducement that create a substantial risk that such an offense will be committed by persons other than those who are ready to commit it

doesnt include WI 2nd element, no burden shifting (if D acn show inducement then the LEO has doen something wrong0

Ex post facto

i.      Criminalizes an act that was not previously ac rime

ii.    Imposes a punishment on someone not previously subject to punishment

iii.   Increases punishment OR
makes proof of guilt easier

fair notice

·  Exceptions:

·      Crimes of omission

·      Wont apply to crimes of commission (ignorance will still apply)

·      No actual knowledge of the law (subjective)

·      No probability of knowledge (objective -a reasonable person wouldn’t have known it existed)

void for vaugness

·  Define statute with sufficient definite that ordinary people can understand (objective)

·  In a manner that does not encourage arbitrary & discriminatory enforcement

necessity defense

i.      D acted under pressure of natural physical force

ii.    Reasonable belief of imminent DGBH or public disaster

iii.   Reasonable belief that D act was only way tp prevent DBGH or public disaster

coersion

i.      HUMAN threat

ii.    Reasonable belief of DGBH

iii.   Reasonable belief that D act was the only way to prevent DGBH

attempt

a.     Sufficient acts toward target offense so that desistance is impossible

b.     Intent to commit target offense

limts: recklessness ,strict liability, knowledge, have to be felony

inchoate conspiracy

a.     Agree that target offense will be committed

b.     Intent that target offense will be committed

c.     Overt act

PTAC conspiracy

                                             1.     Agree that target offense is to be committed

                                             2.     Intent to aid target offense

                                             3.     Offense was actually committed (charged or NPC )

aid and abetting

a.     Aid commission of target offense

i.      Assist the person who commits crime OR

ii.    Ready and willingness to assist AND willingness is known by the person who commits crime (moral support)

b.     Intent to aid target offense

c.     Charged offense was actually committed

i.      voluntary withdrawal can still be convicted unless the crime is stopped (wi)

d.     Charged offense is either

i.      Target offense

ii.    A natural and probable consequences (objective)

solistication

a.     D commanded, induced or persuaded another to commit a crime

Intent for crime to be committed

imperfect SD

·  Actual belief in imminent death or GBH

·  Actual belief that lethal force used was necessary

ii.    ONLY FOR 1^st DEGREE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE

perfect SD (lethal)

i.      D reasonably believed that they faced unlaw interference with the person/ threated imment DGBH

ii.    D reasonably believed that the amount of force was necessary to prevent or terminate interference or prevent DGBH

perfect SD (non lethal

i.      Reasonable belief that the D is facing an unlaw interference

ii.    A reasonable belief that the D’s conduct amount of force necessary to terminate or prevent interference