What Is Necessity in Criminal Law?

Necessity in criminal law is a defense asserting that a defendant committed a crime to prevent a greater harm. This defense is typically applied in situations where the defendant acts under imminent threat to life or safety.

Necessity is a legal doctrine that allows a defendant to argue that their unlawful actions were justified in order to prevent a greater harm from occurring. Under this doctrine, the defendant must demonstrate that they faced an imminent threat, that no legal alternatives were available, and that the harm prevented was greater than the harm caused by their actions. This defense does not apply if the harm caused exceeds the harm avoided, or if the defendant created the necessity situation themselves.

In many jurisdictions, necessity is often distinguished from duress, which involves the threat of violence or physical harm. Unlike duress, where the threat compels a person to act against their will, necessity arises from a situation where the individual believes they must act to avert a crisis. For instance, if a person breaks into a cabin during a storm to seek shelter, they might invoke necessity as a defense if charged with trespass.

Key principles of necessity include proportionality—actions taken must align with the level of perceived threat—as well as an objective standard that examines whether a reasonable person would have acted similarly under the circumstances. Courts generally favor necessity in emergencies where human life is at stake and weigh the necessity defense heavily when assessing the circumstances and motivations behind the defendant's actions.

Notably, the application of necessity can vary across jurisdictions, with some requiring it to be strictly defined within certain categories of offenses. Some courts may accept necessity as a defense in property crimes, while others may limit its application strictly to personal safety cases. Ultimately, necessity is an exceptional legal theory that invites both moral and legal considerations, making its successful application complex and varied across cases.

• 1People v. Unger (1977) - The court recognized necessity as a defense when the defendant had to break into a building to evade a life-threatening situation.
• 2U.S. v. Schoon (2002) - Established that necessity must involve an imminent threat and that the actions taken must not create or contribute to the situation necessitating the crime.
• 3State v. Wylie (1980) - The court explained the need for proportionality in necessity claims, emphasizing the need for the harm avoided to significantly outweigh the harm caused.

• necessity-defense-in-criminal-law
• difference-between-necessity-and-duress
• key-principles-of-criminal-defenses