Necessity

Description: Necessity is a defense in criminal law that allows a person to be excused from criminal liability for an otherwise criminal act if the person was acting under a necessity to prevent a greater harm.
Number of Questions: 5
Created by:
Tags: criminal law necessity
Attempted 0/5 Correct 0 Score 0

In the defense of necessity, what must the defendant prove?

  1. That they were acting under a threat of imminent harm.

  2. That they had no other reasonable option to avoid the harm.

  3. That the harm they caused was less than the harm they were trying to prevent.

  4. All of the above.


Correct Option: D
Explanation:

In order to successfully assert the defense of necessity, the defendant must prove that they were acting under a threat of imminent harm, that they had no other reasonable option to avoid the harm, and that the harm they caused was less than the harm they were trying to prevent.

Which of the following is NOT an example of a situation where the defense of necessity might be successfully asserted?

  1. A person steals food to feed their starving family.

  2. A person breaks into a house to escape a fire.

  3. A person kills another person in self-defense.

  4. A person destroys property to prevent a terrorist attack.


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

Self-defense is not a defense to necessity. This is because the harm caused by the defendant (killing another person) is not less than the harm the defendant was trying to prevent (being killed).

The defense of necessity is most closely related to which of the following defenses?

  1. Self-defense

  2. Duress

  3. Entrapment

  4. Insanity


Correct Option: A
Explanation:

The defense of necessity is most closely related to the defense of self-defense. This is because both defenses involve a person acting to prevent a greater harm.

Which of the following factors is NOT relevant to the determination of whether the defense of necessity is successful?

  1. The nature of the harm the defendant was trying to prevent.

  2. The nature of the harm the defendant caused.

  3. The imminence of the harm the defendant was trying to prevent.

  4. The availability of other reasonable options to avoid the harm.


Correct Option: B
Explanation:

The nature of the harm the defendant caused is not relevant to the determination of whether the defense of necessity is successful. This is because the defense of necessity focuses on the harm the defendant was trying to prevent, not the harm the defendant caused.

In a jurisdiction that recognizes the defense of necessity, which of the following is NOT a potential consequence of a successful assertion of the defense?

  1. The defendant will be found not guilty.

  2. The defendant will be sentenced to a lesser punishment.

  3. The defendant will be required to pay restitution to the victim.

  4. The defendant will be required to perform community service.


Correct Option: C
Explanation:

In a jurisdiction that recognizes the defense of necessity, a successful assertion of the defense will typically result in the defendant being found not guilty or being sentenced to a lesser punishment. However, the defendant will not be required to pay restitution to the victim.

- Hide questions