Final-POLS 259A

• Taking of personal property in the possession of another.
• From his person or immediate presense
• Against hiw will
• With use of force or fear
• With intent to steal

• Seizure of person
• Asportation (movement), substancial distance
• Force or fear
• Intent to deprive person of liberty

• Intentional and
• Unlawful
• Harful or offensive
• Touching
• Of another

• Justification:focuses on the act: that is not wrong under the circumstances
• -self defense, defense of another, necessity.

• Excuse: focuses on the actor: that he should not be held responsible, under the circumstances.
• -duress, insanity, involuntary intoxication

A non-aggressor is justified in using force if:

• He reasonably believes:
• -that such force (proportionality)
• -is necessary to protect himself
• -from imminent use
• -of lawfulforce by the other person

• Women are physically mentally abuse by their partner
• form of past trauma stress
• Cycle of abuse: 3 stages: Tension building, Battering, Honey Faize

• Majority (CA)- May stand and defend
• Minority (& CL)-retreat, if safe place

• Voluntary Manslaughter
• -jury could find honest, but unreasonable belief in the need for self defense (flannel).

• Can never use deadly force [to protect your property]
• May use non-deadly force

• -amount that reasonably appears necessary
• -to defend property from someone taking it.
• -Fresh pursuit

• Can run after and take back something that was just stolen.
• Can use it, if someone steals property from you.

• CA: yes, if the defendent believes:
• -deadly force is necessary to prevent
• -imminent and unlawful entry into dwelling
• -and entry is do to violence to someone inside.

• Generally, victim cannot consent to behavior that is a crime (harm society)
• Can consent to contact that might otherwise be a battery if:
• -it doesn't result in serious injury OR
• -sports (within the parameters) OR
• -it is a beneficial activity (like surgery)

• He did not know the nature and quality of the act OR
• Did not know right from wrong

A disturbance of mental or physical capacities resulting from the ingestion of a foreign substance, such as alcohol or a (legal or illegal) drug.

• Commonly Occurs, but rately a defense
• -sometimes negate the intent needed for the offense.

• Rarely occurs, but often a defense
• Example: intoxication by mistake or unexpected intoxication (due to pathology or unusual reaction to prescribed meds)

• negate intent
• temporary insanity

*He "made me do it" is a defense if:

• threat is
• -credible (defendent reasonably believes it)
• to kill or seriously injure defendent or 3rd party
• -Harm is imminent

• No alternative
• Defendent has "clean hands"
• -other not involved

*Inapplicable to criminal homocide

Ø Offense was induced by a government agent AND

Ø D was not predisposed to commit the type of offense charged.

• ØWas the conduct of the law enforcement agent
• likely to induce a normally law-abiding person to commit the offense?

1.Imminent danger

• 2.Causal:
• action will abate harm

3.No effective legal way to avert the harm

4.Lesser of evils

5.Legislature has not precluded the defense

• 6.Clean hands:
• actor did not create the necessity

• •Perpetrator:
• –One who commits
• the crime

• •Accomplices:
• –Intentionally assists the perpetrator. Sometimes present at crime; sometimes not

• •Accessory after the fact:
• –Knowingly assists felon to avoid arrest, trial or conviction

When that crime is foreseeable

• •Intends:
• –to assist the perpetrator AND
• –for perpetrator to commit the target offense.

• •Example:
• –Get-away driver for burglary, Andrew Accomplice, intends to help Peter Perp and intends for Peter to commit the burglary

• •Physical Conduct
• –Providing weapons, lookout, getaway car

• •Psychological Influence
• –Encouragement

• •Assistance by omission
• –Legal duty to act + mere presence

• oMR:
• intent to commit target offense +

• oAR:
• substantial step: act or acts to carry out the crime (perpetration) +

oT.O. unsuccessful

oPerpetration, not mere preparation

• oPreparation:
• -Thinking of crime, deciding to go
• forward, planning or preparing for the crime

• oPerpetration
• -beginning the crime, putting the
• plan into action

• oWhat if D voluntarily abandons the target
• crime after s/he committed the attempt?
• Defense?

• oIn many states, yes. In CA, NOT a defense to the attempted
• crime.