We bring law and order to search results

About us  |  Why use us?  |  Press  |  Contact us

Topic: Self-defense

Ads by Google      Nuremberg Trials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Because the court was limited to violations of the laws of war, it did not have jurisdiction over crimes that took place before the outbreak of war on September 1, 1939. The legal basis for the jurisdiction of the court was that by the Instrument of Surrender of Germany, political authority for Germany had been transferred to the Allied Control Council which having sovereign power over Germany could choose to punish violations of international law and the laws of war. Subsequent Nuremberg Trials for the trials before the NMT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials   (2034 words)      Insanity defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The insanity defense is available in most jurisdictions that respect human rights and have a rule of law, though the extent to which it can or should be applied may differ widely between jurisdictions, e.g. In a criminal trial, the insanity defenses are possible defenses by excuse, via which defendants may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law, as they were mentally ill at the time of their allegedly "criminal" actions. In the United States, a trial in which the insanity defense is invoked typically involves the testimony of psychiatrists who will argue that the defendant is or is not insane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense   (2027 words)      Insanity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Moral insanity was used in Great Britain in the 19th century in court and criminal defense pleas. An insanity defense is based on claiming that the defendant suffers from a mental disorder severe enough to meet either of these criteria, and that a sentence should therefore involve treatment rather than punishment (or, in the case of temporary insanity, that no sentence should be applied at all). In criminal law, criminal insanity is usually defined as an inability to either determine the difference between "right" and "wrong" (or, in a more practical or direct sense, "legal" and "illegal") or understand the consequences of one's own actions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity   (775 words)      Insanity defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The insanity defense is available in most jurisdictions that respect human rights and have a rule of law, though the extent to which it can be applied may differ widely between jurisdictions. The use of the insanity defense in cases of psychopathy is rare and almost uniformly unsuccessful. In the United States, a trial in which the insanity defense is invoked typically involves the testimony of psychiatrists which argue that the defendant is or is not insane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense   (1547 words)      Encyclopedia: Affirmative defense Self defense and defense of others (sometimes called alter ego defense or defense of a third person) are a pair of legal theories under which otherwise tortious or illegal acts may be justified when committed for the purpose of protecting oneself, or for the purpose of protecting another person. An affirmative defense is a defense used in litigation between private parties in common law jurisdictions. Affirmative defenses work to limit or excuse a defendant's liability even if the plaintiff's claim is proven, based on facts outside those claimed by the plaintiff. http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Affirmative-defense   (865 words)      Notable Court Decisions Concerning Criminal Law Procedural Posture: The trial court gave a jury instruction on self- defense, and supplemented it with a statement that they must determine, from the subjective viewpoint of a battered wife, whether the D.'s belief that she was in imminent danger was reasonable. Procedural Posture: The trial court refused the defense's request for a jury instruction stating that the Government must prove that he had actual knowledge that the false statements were made in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal agency. Procedural Posture: All were convicted in a Florida municipal court, and all convictions were upheld by the Florida appellate courts. http://www.lectlaw.com/files/lws50.htm   (18545 words)      Defense Defense of others The defense of others ( alter ego defense or defense of a third person) is a possible courts have rul... Defense (legal) In most liability, civil or criminal. Defense of Marriage Act The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is a same-sex unions" if other states did recognize same-sex... http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/topics/defense.html   (18545 words)      USCA1 Opinion 02-2640 Hardiman, 971 F.2d at 503 ("Unless the state procedural bar defense can be raised sua sponte, a state that fails to raise that defense can effectively force a federal court to review the merits of a case that may be simpler to decide on procedural grounds."). He begins with the proposition that procedural default is an affirmative defense and that, therefore, the government may lose the defense by neglecting to raise it in a response to a habeas petition. At that juncture, Oakes was entitled to assume that the defense was by the boards and the fact that he had preemptively addressed the defense in his original pro se petition does not alter this entitlement. http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2640.01A   (2815 words)      EROSION OF THE RIGHT TO PUT ON A DEFENSE Consequently, ten states forbid the use of the voluntary intoxication defense in criminal cases, and others currently are contemplating the same prohibition. Moreover, however, it is the truth-seeking structure of the amendment that causes abrogation of the voluntary intoxication defense to have the effect of impeding the ability of criminal defendants to establish defenses. Despite defense counsel's response that "she had no intention of relitigating the issue of voluntariness," but rather sought only to attack the credibility of the confession, the trial court agreed with the prosecution and granted its motion to prevent the introduction of such evidence. http://www.law.msu.edu/lawrev/98-4/fitzpatrick.htm   (7870 words)      Twinkie defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This biological defense is a so-called "innovative defense", through which defendants argue that they either should not be held criminally liable for actions which broke the law, or that the criminal liability should be mitigated to a lesser offense (e.g. The case which gave rise to the term did not actually contain any defense meeting this description, but was widely misdescribed as doing so. A similar defense appears in Trial and Error, when an expert witness is called to testify that sugar in the Twinkies the defendant had eaten is chemically similar to cocaine, so the defendant's actions should be treated as if in a drug-induced state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie_defense   (751 words)      Franklin v. Johnson But here, the state itself has in effect procedurally defaulted, by failing to inform the district court and the petitioner of the asserted procedural reason why petitioner may not be heard in state or federal court. But where, as here, the defenses are entirely consistent with each other, and where the relied-upon defense had already been rejected by the trial court as "not well taken," the decision not to investigate before deciding whether to pursue a given trial strategy cannot be deemed reasonable. Because this case involves a procedural bar in name only, and actually is based upon Franklin' s failure to exhaust his claims in state court, I believe that § 2254(b)(3) applies to protect the State from its failure to raise this argument in the district court. http://www.law.com/regionals/ca/opinions/may/0036108.shtml   (6339 words)      Defense (legal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Note that apart from this defense against prosecution and liability, there is also defense against an attacker, which can be a legal justification, see self defense and defense of others, defense of property. In most litigation under the common law adversarial system the defendant, perhaps with the assistance of counsel, may allege or present defenses (or defences) in order to avoid liability, civil or criminal. With the exception of alibis; these defenses do not argue that the defendant didn't commit a criminal act (which broke the law); but rather, that the defendant should not be held criminally liable for said act. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_(legal)   (6339 words)      OCCA: OUJI-CR 8-36 The Court of Criminal Appeals has specifically ruled that the defense of intoxication is not available in murder cases. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to a crime having a general mens rea requirement, such as criminal negligence. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to the crime of rape, because rape does not have a specific criminal intent mens rea requirement. http://www.occa.state.ok.us/online/oujis/oujisrvr.jsp?o=487   (867 words)      Self-defense (theory) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Self defense and defense of others (in the United States called alter ego defense or defense of a third person) convert what would otherwise have been tortious or criminal acts into excused (sometimes termed justified) acts when committed for the purpose of protecting oneself or another person. Thus, lawful "pre-emptive" self defense is simply the act of landing the first-blow in a situation that has reached a point of no hope for de-escalation or escape. Many self-defense instructors and experts believe that if the situation is so clear-cut as to feel certain violence is unavoidable, the defender has a much better chance of surviving by landing the first blow and gaining the immediate upper hand to quickly stop the risk to their person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_defense_and_defense_of_others   (1419 words)      Legal Defense Approved legal defense funds are available upon the authorization of any local lodge or State Board of Director members in cases of an incident where the officer/member is involved in a situation where serious or fatal injuries have occurred as a result of an officer/ member's actions within the scope of his/her employment. By the provision of a legal defense fund, the State Lodge in no way admits the liability of the officer-member, nor does the State Lodge admit any liability of the FOP in conjunction with the officer- member. The FOP is subrogated, up to the amount given towards legal defense, to any amounts received by the member as an award in the case. http://www.ncfop.org/legal_defense.htm   (1419 words)      Permanent Defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Permanent Defense claims that its mission is for the good of Washington State and its taxpayers. Permanent Defense also continued its opposition to Tim Eyman in 2004 with allies TaxSanity.org and Taxpayers for Washington's Future by filing a complaint against Eyman with the state Permanent Defense's Chair vows that the organization will be around as long as Eyman continues to be active in the political process. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Defense   (1419 words)      USCA6 Opinion 03a0287p.06 The Ohio appellate court in this case invoked the procedural bar imposed by defense counsel’s failure to lodge a contemporaneous objection sufficiently to preclude federal court review of this claim on habeas. First, the court must determine that there is a state procedural rule that is applicable to the petitioner's claim and that the petitioner failed to comply with the rule. Second, the court must decide whether the state courts actually enforced the state procedural sanction. http://www.michbar.org/opinions/us_appeals/2003/081403/19937.html   (4510 words)      No. 4033 The Union also asserted that it was surprised by the County's procedural defenses and it reserved the right to request an adjournment to allow it to prepare to meet those defenses if needed in light of the County's case on the procedural arbitrability issue. Arbitration law is well settled that the defenses of nonarbitrability need not be pleaded during the grievance procedure, let alone in documents processing the case to arbitration. For the foregoing reasons, thenr the Arbitrator concludes that the County waived its timeliness defense by failing to raise it during the prearbitral processing of the grievance, such that the grievance is procedurally arbitrable. http://www.wisbar.org/res/wercg/1990/4033.htm   (2616 words)      State v. Wead, A-99-782, 9 Neb. App. 177 This court held that once defense counsel made the trial court aware of the question of Johnson’s competency, the power of the trial court under § 29-1823 to examine competency was triggered. The only exceptions are for the defenses of insufficiency of the indictment, information, or complaint; ineffective assistance of counsel; and lack of jurisdiction. Additionally, in the instant case, the district court did not hold a competency hearing; therefore, we are not presented with the procedural due process issues that were present in State v. http://www.nol.org/home/ncpa/ctopinio/A99-782.htm   (1698 words)      Affirmative Defenses - Colorado Springs Criminal Defense Attorney Robert D. Gustafson Voluntary or self-induced Intoxication is an affirmative defense to certain crimes or their lesser included offenses - that, at the time of the alleged offense(s), lacked the capacity to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law because of intoxication that was not self-induced. Intoxication of the accused is not a defense to a criminal charge, except that a person is not criminally responsible for his conduct if intoxication was not self-induced and was intoxicated to a degree that was unable to formulate the requisite specific intent or to act knowingly or recklessly with respect to the circumstance. When evidence relating to the defense of justification under this section is offered by the defendant, before it is submitted for the consideration of the jury, the court shall first rule as a matter of law whether the claimed facts and circumstances would, if established, constitute a justification. http://www.criminal-defense-colorado-springs.com/Affirmative-Defenses.htm   (4389 words)      Politics: The Insanity Defense The defense argues that, yes, the accused did shoot and kill the person and did so intentionally, but because the act was commited in self-defense the accused does not bear criminal responsibilty for it. INTRODUCTION The insanity defense refers to that branch of the concept of insanity which defines the extent to which men accused of crimes may be relieved of criminal responsibility by virtue of mental disease. Insanity is a legal, not a medical definition. http://www.cyberessays.com/Politics/126.htm   (3589 words)      Permanent Defense Policies Permanent Defense implies absolutely no warranties or guarantees to content provided on this site. Permanent Defense allows for the reproduction and distribution of site content it produces under its Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 license. However, Permanent Defense makes no warranty or guarantee that the information will be used in the exact manner in which you specified. http://permanentdefense.homestead.com/Policies.html   (3589 words)      NMHA Position Statement - In Support of the Insanity Defense Thus, from the origins of the insanity defense, considerations of morality were combined with the factual question of whether or not the accused rationally appreciated the consequences of his or her act. Whether or not elimination of the insanity defense is unconstitutional, as the state courts considering the question have consistently held While it has not yet confronted this country’s highest court, the abolition of the extrinsic defense of insanity in favor of the mens rea approach has become a hotly contested issue among legal scholars as well as the few state court judges who have grappled with it. http://www.nmha.org/position/ps18.cfm   (3717 words)      Forensic-Evidence: The Insanity Defense - A Constitutional Right? Oregon, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the procedural method for determining legal insanity is, for the most part, a state's prerogative, the court also made clear in Leland that the defense itself could not be abolished. The Nevada Supreme Court disagreed with those state supreme courts that have ruled that the insanity defense is not a federal fundamental right under the Due Process Clause. On appeal, Finger argued that Nevada's abolishment of insanity as an affirmative defense violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Nevada Constitution. http://www.forensic-evidence.com/site/Behv_Evid/Finger_insanity.html   (2179 words)      990719.htm In 1986 and 1987, they steadfastly told the police and defense investigators that they were sure about their story.*fn7 To this day, none of the three has wavered from his belief that it was Tracy Parker whom they saw on September 17, 1986. Such evidence would clearly have provided a strong defense and "[counsel's] failure to investigate [was] inexplicable, as [was] his failure to utilize[the brother's] confession, except as the result of incompetence and indifference." Id. at 1459. In arguing against procedural default of this issue, Joseph points to an argument he made in state court claiming ineffective assistance of counsel because the attorneys provided to him by the public defender's office were overburdened and provided inadequate resources. http://www.capitaldefenseweekly.com/archives/990719.htm   (7626 words)      Chewbacca Defense - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Chewbacca Defense is a satirical term for any legal strategy that seeks to overwhelm its audience with nonsensical arguments and thus confuse them into failing to take account of the opposing arguments and, ultimately, to reject them. The term Chewbacca Defense is used on many weblogs and Internet discussion forums, especially ones that often feature legal issues. For example, commentators have accused the United States Department of Justice (see [7]), Michael Moore (see [8] and [9]), Dan Rather (see [10]), and Randy Cunningham (see [11]) of putting forward Chewbacca Defenses, of one form or another. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_Defense   (7626 words)      2215964.txt Because the pathological intoxication defense is not a viable defense under Virginia law, appellant was not "prejudiced by the lack of expert assistance" in preparing and presenting such a defense. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in holding as a matter of law that appellant would not be permitted to present evidence of pathological intoxication on the issue of insanity. We find that the defense of pathological insanity, which appellant urges this Court to accept, is merely a form of temporary insanity triggered by voluntary intoxication and that it is, therefore, prohibited under Virginia law. http://www.courts.state.va.us/txtops/2215964.txt   (1240 words)      Crazy Not to Plead Insanity Hendricks was convicted; on appeal, she challenged the trial court's refusal to permit an insanity defense to be entered. Defense attorneys believe that insanity is the only possible defense to the charges against their clients (especially in the case of very serious charges). Defense attorneys use the threat of an insanity defense, with or without their clients' agreement, as bargaining ploys, to attempt to convince prosecutors to come up with better plea offers. http://echo.forensicpanel.com/2001/6/11/crazynot.html   (2328 words)      98-2655 Under the Model Penal Code, intoxication is an affirmative defense when it is not self-induced and renders the actor incapable of appreciating the criminality of his or her conduct, or unable to conform his or her conduct to the law. Because Gardner failed to present evidence that he was so intoxicated as to be unable to distinguish right from wrong, the court properly denied instructing the jury on the involuntary intoxication defense. The evidence must be credible and sufficient to warrant the jury's consideration of the issue as to whether the defendant was intoxicated to the extent it materially affected his or her ability to form the requisite intent. http://www.courts.state.wi.us/html/ca/98/98-2655.htm   (3967 words)      State v. Hammond, 118 N.J. 306 (1990) In addressing the issue whether involuntary intoxication as defined by the Code can be applied as an affirmative defense to the motor vehicle violation of driving while intoxicated, the Court must determine initially whether a violation of the Motor Vehicle Act constitutes an "offense" within the meaning of the Code of Criminal Justice. We hold that the provisions of the Code governing principles of liability are not applicable to the motor vehicle violation of driving while intoxicated under N.J.S.A. The Code defense of involuntary intoxication, N.J.S.A. 2C:2-8, is not a defense to this violation. [I]ntoxication is not a defense unless it establishes a reasonable doubt as to the existence of an element of the offense. http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/bclc/web/njhammon.html   (3509 words)

	About us   |  Why use us?   |  Press   |  Contact us Copyright © 2006 LegalOwl.com Usage implies agreement with terms.