Bookmark and Share

Front Back
Justification defenses
defendants admit they were responsible for their acts but claim what they did was right (justified) under the circumstances
Excuses defenses
Defendants admit what they did was wrong but claim that under the circumstances, they weren't responsible for what they did.
Affirmative defense
Defense in which the defendant bears the burden of production
Burden of production
The responsibility to introduce initial evidence to support a defense.
Burden of persuasion
The responsibility to convince the fact finder of th etruth of the defense
Preponderance of the evidence
More than 50 percent of the evidence proves justification or excuse
Prefect defenses
Defenses that lead to outright acquittal
Imperfect defenses
Defenses reducing, but not eliminating, criminal liability.
General principle of an honest and reasonable belief
Initial aggressor
Someone who provokes an attack and therefore can't use force to defend himself against the attack provoked.
Withdrawal exception
If initial aggressors completely withdraw from the fights they provoke, they can claim the defense of the self-defense.
Imminent danger
Element in self-defense that injury or death is going to happen right now.
Present danger
Danger that's probably going to happen some time in the future but not right now.
Retreat rule
You have to retreat but only if you reasonably believe that backing off won't unreasonably put you in danger of death or serious bodily harm.
Stand-your-ground rule
If you didn't start the fight, you can stand your ground and kill
The area immediately surrounding a dwelling
Necessity (choice-of-evils defense)
General principle of an honest and resonable belief that it's necessary tocommit a lesser crime (evil) to prevent the imminent danger of a greater crime (evil).
General principle of necessity (defense to crime)
The justification of committing a lesser crime to avoid the imminent danger of a greater crime.
Defense of consent
A justification defense that says if mentally competent adults want to be crime victims, no paternalistic government should get in their way.
A defense in which the defedant accepts responsibility for the act but claims what they did was right is termed a:
Justification defense
A defense in which the defendant admits the act, but claims they aren't legally responsible is termed an:
In many jurisdictions, affirmative defenses typically have to be proven by the defendant:
By a preponderance of the evidence.
If the evidence establishes an imperfect defense, it might show a _______ circumstance that leads to less than a maximum penalty for the crime the defendant is convicted of:
In most jurisdictions, the person's belief that self-defense was necessary must be:
objectively reasonable
Defensive force may be used only if the threat or danger is:
The general rule is that self-defense is available only against ____ attacks.
A person who was the initial aggressor or attacker can gain a lawful right to self-defense if they __________ from the incident they started.
completely withdraw
The amount of force used in self-defense must be:
objectively reasonable and necessary
In some jurisdictions, a person must retreat before using defensive deadly force if:
they can reasonably do so in safety.
In most states, a(n) _____ danger that a person reasonably believes is always hanging over them does not justify the use of self-defense.
Which type of case raises the issues of present danger and the requirement that self-defense is only allowed to protect a person against an imminent attack?
a physically battered wife who kills her abusive husband in his sleep
_________ never justifies the use of force against another person.
The retreat requirement is weakest or nonexistent when persons are attacked:
in their own homes.
The trend in the law of using force to defend others who are attacked is to:
broaden the class of persons who can lawfully be defended.
The modern right to use force against those unlawfully entering the person's home generally:
does not include defense of the curtilage.
The choice-of-evils defense requires that the evil or harm confronting the defendant be:
unavoidable and imminent.
Which of the following would be a valid choice-of-evils defense?
A person destroys a house to prevent the spread of fire to a hospital and
other houses.
To provide a valid consent defense, the consent of the victim must be:
knowing and voluntary.
The general rule is that a person cannot use deadly force:
to protect personal property such as computers and televisions.
x of y cards