Imperfect self-defense

Imperfect self-defense is a common law doctrine of criminal procedure recognized by some jurisdictions whereby a defendant may mitigate punishment or sentencing imposed for a crime involving the use of deadly force by claiming, as a partial affirmative defense, the honest but unreasonable belief that the actions were necessary to counter an attack.

Effect

::—Answers.com [ [http://www.answers.com/topic/self-defense?cat=biz-fin Answers.com web site entry on "self defense"] . Accessed December 21, 2007.]

It may also be used to make a plea bargain to a lesser included offense.Fact|date=December 2007

Examples in common law

For example, in the U.S. state of California a defendant can be convicted of manslaughter but not murder when imperfect self-defense applies. [citation | date = August 29, 1996, Decided | title = State v. Humphrey | author = Supreme Court of California | id = 921 P.2d 1; 1996 Cal. LEXIS 4222 ] [Janet Grumer, "Note", Loyola Law Review, Summer 2003, p. 1575, found at [http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v36-issue4/documents/9selfdefense.pdf Loyola Law Review article] . Accessed December 21, 2007.]

The doctrine of imperfect self-defense recognizes a defendant’s honest but "unreasonable" belief that deadly force is necessary. An appellate court in Kansas held that "Imperfect self defense is an intentional killing committed with an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances justified deadly force." [ [http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/court_of_appeals/Recent_Opinions/20070613/7-193.pdf "State v. Jones", 8 P.3d 1282, 1287 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000)] .]

Another court, in Maryland, held that:::—"State v. Faulkner", 483 A.2d 759,769 (Md. 1984) [ [http://www.iowabar.org/IACOURTOFAPPEALS.nsf/9db187f4b2a6140186256dab0057d0c0/c728efe9fd4b49a2862572f90056a22a!OpenDocument "State v. Faulkner", 483 A.2d 759, 769 (Md. 1984)] ]

Michigan also recognizes imperfect self-defense as a qualified defense that can mitigate second-degree murder to voluntary manslaughter. [ [http://www.umich.edu/~clemency/clemency_manual/manual_appendix08.html Michigan Jury Instructions on line] . Accessed December 21, 2007.] However, the doctrine can only be used where the defendant would have had a right to self-defense but for the fact that the defendant was the initial aggressor. ["People v. Deason", 148 Mich. App. 27, 31, 384 N.W.2d 72 (1985)]

ee also

*Self-defense
*Castle Doctrine

References