Affirmative Defenses and Legal Justifications in Criminal Law

Introduction to Criminal Defenses and Affirmative Defenses

• Conceptual Overview: This module, focusing on Chapter 7, marks a transition from the preliminary chapters of the course toward specific crime categories. While the course eventually covers substantive elements of specific crimes (beginning with homicide at the midterm), this section focuses on the legal strategies used to challenge criminal liability.

• Defensive Strategies:

  • Challenge to Burden of Proof: This is a passive defense where the defendant does not necessarily provide a counter-narrative but challenges the state to meet its burden of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt."

  • Affirmative Defenses: These are active defenses where the accused generally admits to the physical act of the crime but claims a legal excuse or justification that negates criminal responsibility. The logic follows: "I did it, but [this circumstance] happened, so I am not legally guilty."

Immunity as a Defense

• Definition: A defense where the individual claims they cannot be charged because they hold a special status or legal protection. It essentially says, "I did it, but you cannot charge me."

• Legislative Immunity:

  • Context: Primarily applies to members of the state legislature while in session.

  • Indiana Example: Members of the Indiana General Assembly are immune from certain charges while the assembly is in session. This does not apply to serious and violent felonies.

  • Case Example: A legislator from Terre Haute was found by police in an alley downtown (near a venue called Ike and Jonesy's) engaged in conduct that should have been restricted to a restroom. He was not charged with disorderly conduct until the day after the legislative session concluded, at which point he entered a plea agreement.

• Witness Immunity:

  • Transactional Immunity: The witness is granted complete immunity from prosecution for any offenses related to the specific "transaction" or event they are testifying about. This is common for "snitches" or partners in crime who testify against one another.

  • Use Immunity: The state agrees not to use the witness's specific testimony against them. However, the state may still charge the witness if they can obtain independent evidence separate from the testimony. This is relatively rare.

  • Prevalent Form: A more common hybrid involves a defendant pleading to a lesser charge in exchange for immunity from harsher sentences or higher-level charges.

• Executive Immunity Example: Richard Nixon claimed immunity during the Watergate scandal, eventually resigned, and was never prosecuted for charges people believed he might be liable for.

Mistake and Ignorance of the Law

• Mistake of Fact:

  • Defense Logic: "I did it, but I didn't mean to because I didn't know the facts."

  • Function: It acts as a defense if it negates the required state of mind (knowledge or intent) for a specific offense.

  • Strict Liability Exception: Mistake is never a defense in strict liability cases. For example, in U.S. v. Park, the defendant (the CEO of a food factory) could not claim a mistake regarding the presence of rodents, as the law holds him responsible regardless of intent or knowledge.

• Ignorance of the Law:

  • General Maxim: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

  • Exceptions: It may negate intent in rare, highly complex cases, such as certain tax laws where a person may genuinely not realize they were required to pay a specific amount. Generally, not knowing an act was illegal is not a valid defense.

Intoxication

• Voluntary Intoxication:

  • Definition: Intoxication resulting from a person drinking or consuming substances by their own choice.

  • Status: It is nearly always ($99.9\%$ of the time) not a valid defense.

  • Specific Intent: In some states, it may be used to negate specific intent. For example, if a person is charged with "possession with intent to distribute" while heavily intoxicated, they may argue they were too drunk to form the specific "intent to distribute," even if they are still guilty of simple possession.

• Involuntary Intoxication:

  • Status: A potential defense, though highly difficult to prove. The defendant must show they were forced to consume the substance or were unaware they were consuming it.

• Related to Insanity: In some states, addiction-related intoxication is treated under the umbrella of insanity, though this is not the case specifically in Indiana. It is often treated as a mitigating factor during sentencing rather than a full trial defense.

Duress and Necessity

• Duress:

  • Definition: I did it because "the devil made me do it," meaning a third party compelled the defendant to commit the crime under threat of death or serious injury.

  • The Patty Hearst Case (1970s): Hearst, a wealthy heir, was kidnapped by an underground terrorist group. During her captivity, she was filmed participating in a bank robbery while wielding a weapon and wearing a trench coat. She claimed duress during her trial, but the defense was unsuccessful, and she was convicted.

• Necessity:

  • Definition: The defense claims that the harm sought to be avoided by committing the crime was greater than the harm caused by the crime itself.

  • The Shipwreck Cases: In the $1800s$, individuals shipwrecked on boats occasionally killed and ate an unconscious or dying member of their party to survive. When rescued and charged with murder, they successfully used the necessity defense by arguing the survival of the group outweighed the death of one person already near death.

  • Modern Unsuccessful Example: A defendant in Indiana with a lifetime license suspension was caught driving. He claimed necessity because his daughter was sick at a party and he had to drive her to the hospital. The jury did not accept this defense.

Alibi

• Definition: The assertion that the accused was physically present at a location other than the crime scene when the crime occurred.

• Notice Requirement: The defendant must notify the state in advance if they intend to use an alibi defense. This is a procedural exception to the Fifth Amendment.

  • Reasoning: While defendants have the right to remain silent, the state also has a right to a fair trial. Advance notice allows the prosecution to investigate the alibi. If the alibi is verified, it saves the court time and resources by potentially leading to a dismissal before trial.

Authority and Double Jeopardy

• Under the Authority of Another:

  • Logic: "My boss made me do it" or "I was just following orders."

  • Examples:

    • Watergate: Nixon's subordinates claimed they were following the President's orders. This was not a successful defense.

    • Vietnam/My Lai Massacre: Lieutenant William Calley was court-martialed for killing civilians. He argued he was following orders in the field to preserve his unit, but he was convicted.

• Double Jeopardy (Fifth Amendment):

  • Core Rule: No person can be tried twice for the same crime. This prevents the state from getting "two bites at the apple."

  • Attachment of Jeopardy: Jeopardy "attaches" once a jury is sworn in or once the first witness is sworn in during a bench trial. If a case is dismissed after this point, it cannot be refiled.

  • Exclusions:

    • Hung Juries: If a jury cannot reach a verdict, it is not double jeopardy to hold a second trial.

    • Dual Sovereignty: A person can be tried in both state and federal courts for the same conduct without violating double jeopardy, as they are separate jurisdictions.

  • Case Examples:

    • Rodney King: The LA police officers were acquitted in state court for excessive force. Due to public outcry and riots, the federal government (US Attorney) charged them for the same conduct, leading to convictions.

    • Ash v. Swenson: A case involving the robbery of six victims during a single poker game. The court ruled that charging the robbers with six separate cases was a violation of double jeopardy.

Entrapment

• Definition: The claim that the criminal intent originated in the minds of the police, rather than the defendant.

• The Test of Predisposition: Entrapment occurs if the defendant was not "predisposed" to commit the crime and was persuaded or coerced by police. It is not entrapment if the police merely fool a person into a sale (e.g., an undercover buy where the dealer already intended to sell).

• Key Cases:

  • John DeLorean: The famous car manufacturer was filmed in a hotel room with undercover agents, drugs, and money, expressing excitement over a deal. He successfully claimed entrapment at trial and was acquitted.

  • Jacobson v. U.S.: US authorities targeted a farmer, soliciting him for two years to subscribe to a child pornography magazine. After repeatedly saying no, he finally agreed. The Supreme Court overturned his conviction, ruling that the government had created the intent where none previously existed.

Miscellaneous Defenses

• Speedy Trial: A constitutional right. If a defendant in jail requests a speedy trial, the trial must typically occur within a specific window (historically $60$ days, now often $70$ to $90$ days depending on jurisdiction). Generally, a case must be tried within one year of charging, excluding delays requested by the defendant.

• Statute of Limitations:

  • Murder: No statute of limitations; can be charged at any time.

  • Misdemeanors: Usually a $2$-year limit.

  • Felonies: Typically range between $5$ and $6$ years.

• Consent: Common in sex offense cases; the defendant admits the act but claims the other party agreed to it.

• Government Misconduct: Claiming that the act was part of a government program or resulted from following specific government-sanctioned orders.