Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
0 0
Illinois Supreme Court - 362 N.E. 2d 319, 66 Ill. 2d 333
Tags: Criminal law, Necessity defense
Video Summary
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The defendant was convicted of escape from a minimum security honor farm and claimed he left to save his life after being threatened and sexually assaulted by fellow inmates. The trial court erred in giving an instruction stating that the reasons for the alleged escape were immaterial and not to be considered as justifying or excusing the escape. The defendant argued that he left out of necessity or compulsion, but the trial court refused to instruct the jury on these defenses. The principal issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on these defenses. Recent decisions have recognized the applicability of the defenses of compulsion and necessity in certain situations, even for prison escapees, due to public policy concerns. The court distinguishes between the defense of compulsion and necessity, stating that compulsion applies when a defendant is deprived of their free will by the threat of imminent physical harm, while necessity applies when a defendant is forced to choose between two evils. The defendant claimed the defense of necessity, stating that his actions were necessary to avoid a greater injury than the one that might result from his own conduct. The defendant introduced sufficient evidence to support the defense of necessity, which entitled him to have the jury consider the defense based on his testimony.
The dissenting opinion in this case expresses concern that recognizing the necessity defense in prison escape cases could lead to harm to prison guards, police, or citizens. While the defense may be necessary in certain circumstances, such as facing a specific threat of death, sexual attack, or bodily injury in the immediate future, it should be limited to well-defined boundaries. The defendant in this case did not meet the conditions required for a necessity defense, as he did not complain to authorities when threatened and did not immediately report to authorities when reaching a place of safety. The trial court did not err in its instructions, and the appellate court should be reversed and the judgment of the trial court affirmed.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.