Criminal Law · Defenses Excuse

high frequency

MBE Criminal Law: Defenses Excuse

An essential overview of excusable defenses in criminal law for the MBE.

Overview

Defenses in criminal law serve as critical tools that can absolve or mitigate a defendant's liability for committing a crime. The defenses categorized as 'excuses' focus on the individual's personal circumstances, arguing that their action was unreasonable under the given conditions and thus lacking criminal intent. Key examples of excuse defenses include insanity, duress, and age (notably, infancy).

Understanding the parameters of these excuse defenses is crucial for bar exam preparation, particularly as they often lead to nuanced question patterns. Each excuse has specific legal standards that must be evaluated in the context of cases presented on the MBE. Grasping the definitions, applications, and limitations of these defenses is essential to answering related questions accurately during the exam.

Key Rules
  1. The Insanity Defense can exculpate a defendant if at the time of the crime, they lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of their conduct or conform their conduct to the law.
  2. Duress is a valid defense if the defendant was threatened with imminent death or serious bodily harm and had no reasonable opportunity to escape the situation.
  3. Infancy, in most jurisdictions, allows children under a certain age (usually 7) to be exempt from criminal liability.
  4. Intoxication can serve as a defense to specific intent crimes if it negated the mental state necessary for the crime, though voluntary intoxication is typically not a defense to general intent crimes.
  5. Mistake of fact may serve as a defense if it negates the intent required for the crime charged.
Common Question Patterns
  • Applying the insanity standard to provided fact patterns, especially focusing on the M'Naghten or Model Penal Code standards.
  • Evaluating scenarios involving duress and determining whether the threat was immediate and if there was an escape route.
  • Issues revolving around the age of the defendant and whether they fall within the acceptable range for infancy defense.
  • Questions concerning voluntary versus involuntary intoxication and their effects on criminal liability.
  • Assessment of mistake of fact as a defense and how it interacts with intent requirements.
Practice Questions

1. Jimmy, age 6, took candy from a store without paying. He claims he didn’t know it was wrong. What defense can he likely assert?

A. A) Insanity

B. B) Duress

C. C) Infancy(Correct)

D. D) Mistake of fact

Explanation: Infancy is a defense typically asserting that children under a certain age cannot have the capacity to commit a crime. In this case, 6 years old is generally below the threshold for criminal liability.

2. Samantha was threatened with a gun to commit a robbery. She had no opportunity to escape. Which defense applies?

A. A) Insanity

B. B) Duress(Correct)

C. C) Infancy

D. D) Mistake of fact

Explanation: Duress is a valid defense when a person is compelled to commit a crime due to an imminent threat of serious harm.

3. Tom, intoxicated after drinking at a party, accidentally committed battery. What defense could he use?

A. A) Mental incapacity

B. B) Involuntary intoxication

C. C) Infancy

D. D) Voluntary intoxication(Correct)

Explanation: Voluntary intoxication typically cannot be used as a defense to general intent crimes, but may be relevant if the crime requires specific intent.

4. Lucy believed that she was allowed to take her neighbor's bike, having heard them mention lending bikes. Is this a valid defense?

A. A) Infancy

B. B) Mistake of fact(Correct)

C. C) Duress

D. D) Insanity

Explanation: Mistake of fact is a defense if the mistake negates the intent necessary to commit theft; Lucy believed she had permission.

5. Mark, diagnosed with severe schizophrenia, believed he was acting in self-defense when he attacked someone. What defense could he claim?

A. A) Duress

B. B) Infancy

C. C) Insanity(Correct)

D. D) Intoxication

Explanation: The insanity defense could exculpate Mark if he lacked the capacity to understand the nature of his unlawful conduct due to his mental condition.

Test-Taking Tips
  • Read questions carefully to identify the applicable defense based on fact patterns.
  • Focus on the specific terms used in questions—such as 'imminent threat' for duress or 'capacity' for insanity.
  • Practice applying the elements of each defense to various scenarios to enhance retention and understanding.

Master MBE Topics with Briefly

Get AI-powered study tools, practice questions, and comprehensive legal resources.