If you are accused of a crime in Texas, there are certain instances when a defense can be raised to mitigate or even to nullify your responsibility. Such defenses are classified in relation to criminal responsibility. Insanity is a well-known example but is also one that infrequently applies.
Bringing a successful defense that’s related to criminal responsibility is legally complex, which makes working closely with an experienced Round Rock criminal defense attorney key.
Affirmative Defense
An affirmative defense is one in which the defendant, themself, introduces evidence that, if deemed credible, negates their criminal liability in the case – even if they’re proven to have committed the crime in question.
Once a defendant raises an affirmative defense, the burden of proof shifts away from the prosecution and onto the defense. There is nothing, however, that stops a defendant from using an affirmative defense along with a standard defense
The Defense of Insanity
Insanity can be used as an affirmative defense if – at the time the crime in question was committed – the accused, as a result of serious mental disease or defect, didn’t know that their conduct was wrong. Mental disease or defect here does not include anything that is manifest solely as a result of ongoing criminality or of antisocial behavior.
The Statistics
Mental Health America (MHA) reports the following statistics related to the use of the insanity defense in the United States:
It is used in less than 1 percent of all cases.
When a not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) defense is used, it is successful only about 25 percent of the time.
In about 70 percent of the cases in which NGRI is used successfully, both the defense and the prosecution agree that its use is appropriate.
Successfully defending an insanity defense is exceptionally challenging and is generally best reserved for those instances when there is little doubt about the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the crime’s commission.
If you are found not guilty by reason of insanity, you’ll go to a treatment facility rather than to prison – where you’ll be confined for no longer than the prison sentence you would have received if you’d been convicted – unless you are civilly committed after that time period has elapsed.
Case in Point
A very famous successful insanity defense case was tried in Texas in 2001 and retried in 2006. In this case, Andrea Yates was found not guilty by reason of insanity after drowning all five of her children – one after the other – in a bathtub.
The jury came to the unanimous decision that the woman’s mental disorders caused her to irrationally believe that she was helping her children – rather than harming them – by saving them from eternal damnation.
The Mistake of Law Defense
You’ve undoubtedly heard the adage that ignorance of the law is no excuse. While defendants are treated as if they know the law – or reasonably should know the law – there are limited exceptions when a mistake of law defense can be a valid defense.
In order to successfully employ a mistake of law defense, you must be able to prove that you reasonably believed your actions weren’t criminal to begin with and that you reasonably relied on one of the following sources when you came to this conclusion:
An official written statement of the law made by an administrative agency
A court’s written interpretation of the law
A public official who is responsible for interpreting the law
If you can demonstrate that your actions were reasonably guided by a court case or by the written statement or comment of a government official, one element of your mistake of law defense is met. In addition, however, you must prove that you genuinely believed that your actions were legal.
In other words, reading an outrageous statement that was made by a government official and relying upon it as a defense to commit a crime does not suffice as a defense under mistake of law. You must also have reasonably believed that you were on the right side of the law when you committed the crime in question.
The Mistake of Fact Defense
If you formed a reasonable belief about the facts involved in your case and they led you to commit a criminal act, your mistake of fact can negate or mitigate your liability in the matter.
It’s important to note, however, that this extends only as far as your mistaken beliefs carry you. In other words, you can be convicted of a lesser included offense if you would have been found guilty of the lesser crime even if your mistaken beliefs were true.
If all the following apply, an affirmative mistake of fact defense may hold:
You made a reasonable mistake based on the facts available to you.
Had your mistake been correct, you wouldn’t have been convicted of the crime in question.
One of the critical elements of this assessment is whether your mistake was reasonable to begin with. For example, if you grab your bag and leave a party and the bag ends up being someone else’s, you may have a solid mistake of fact defense if the bag you grabbed looks a lot like yours and was near where you left yours.
If the bag looks nothing like yours, however, and you find it in an entirely different spot, your defense of fact position loses credibility. If you make a valid mistake, you shouldn’t face a criminal charge, but there are fewer legal protections afforded as the mistake becomes less and less reasonable.
The Defense of Duress
If you engaged in a criminal activity because you were compelled to do so as a result of another person credibly threatening you or someone else with imminent death or serious bodily injury, the defense of duress may apply.
If the crime in question doesn’t rise to the level of a felony, you can also use the defense of duress if you were compelled to commit the offense through force or the threat of force that left you – a reasonable person – incapable of resisting the pressure exerted upon you.
When Defense of Duress Doesn’t Apply
The defense of duress, however, does not apply if you knowingly, recklessly, or intentionally placed yourself in a situation in which the outcome of being forced to comply with a criminal act was probable.
Further, acting under the persuasion or command of your spouse doesn't translate to a defense of duress – unless the element of compulsion would apply regardless of who did the persuading.
The Threat Must Be Imminent
In order for the defense of duress to apply, the threat of bodily harm or death must be imminent, which means about to happen. If you claim that another person made you do what you did by threatening to hurt or kill you or someone else if you didn’t, the threat must apply at that time – it can’t be a threat that you will be harmed or killed at an indeterminate date in the future.
The Defense of Intoxication
While the defense of intoxication can be used as an affirmative defense, being voluntarily intoxicated does not qualify. Evidence of insanity that is caused by intoxication, however, can be used to diminish the penalty you face for the crime in question.
The bottom line is that you know alcohol and drugs can reduce your inhibitions, which increases the risk that you’ll do something you normally wouldn't. Therefore, if you choose to drink or get high and go on to commit a crime, you can’t employ the affirmative defense of intoxication as a means of mitigating your liability in the matter.
If, however, you’re intoxicated through no fault of your own, it’s a different matter. Involuntary intoxication can be an affirmative defense when the following apply:
You didn’t exercise your own independent judgment in relation to the intoxicant.
The intoxicant left you unable to determine that your conduct was against the law.
If someone slips a drug in your glass that you know nothing about, for example, and you go on to commit a crime under the intoxication it induces, you can turn to the defense of intoxication.
The Defense of Entrapment
If law enforcement induces you to engage in an illegal act through persuasion or another means that was likely to cause you to commit the offense, the defense of entrapment applies. If the authorities merely afford you the opportunity to commit an illegal offense, however, it doesn’t rise to the level of entrapment.
Entrapment applies to governmental overreach, and to prove entrapment, you must be able to demonstrate that each of the following elements applies:
An agent of law enforcement induced you to engage in criminal conduct.
The means of inducement used was likely to cause people other than you – under the same circumstances – to commit the same offense.
You take on the burden of proof when you raise the defense of entrapment, but once you do, the prosecution is tasked with disproving your defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Defense of Age Affecting Criminal Responsibility
In Texas, those who are not yet 17 years old are classified as juveniles, and they generally aren’t charged with adult crimes. Further, those who are not yet 15 years old can’t be prosecuted for any offense – except under highly specific circumstances that include the following:
When the accused has sufficient discretion regarding the nature and obligation of taking a legal oath and goes on to commit perjury or aggravated perjury
When the accused violates a motor vehicle traffic ordinance in an incorporated city or town
When the accused commits a misdemeanor that is punishable by a fine only
When the accused violates a penal ordinance
When the accused commits an especially serious crime
As long as an individual is at least 10 years old, they can be charged with a crime in a Texas juvenile court. Once a teenager turns 17, they automatically go into the adult criminal justice system if they’re charged with a crime in the state, and Texas is one of only three states to employ this low-age threshold.
Further, when serious charges are involved, a much younger teen can be transferred to the adult system, including under the following circumstances for those who are at least 14 years old:
If they are charged with committing a capital felony or a first-degree felony
If they are charged with committing an aggravated felony involving a controlled substance
Those who are at least 15 years old can be transferred to the adult system for any of the following reasons:
If they are accused of committing a second-degree or third-degree felony
If they are accused of committing a state jail felony
Before transferring a juvenile to the adult criminal justice system, the juvenile court must take primary factors like the following into consideration:
The juvenile’s overall level of maturity and sophistication
The juvenile’s prior record
The risk the juvenile poses to the public
The likelihood that the resources available to the juvenile court are adequate to rehabilitate the juvenile
Texas employs a once an adult, always an adult philosophy, which means that once a juvenile is convicted of a felony in adult court, they remain under this adult jurisdiction for any subsequent violations committed before they turn 17. Finally, it’s important to note that, when a juvenile is tried as an adult in Texas, they face the same sentencing that adults do.
Discuss Your Case with an Experienced Round Rock Criminal Defense Attorney Today
Brett Pritchard at The Law Office of Brett H. Pritchard is a very capable criminal defense attorney who dedicates his impressive practice to fiercely advocating for his clients’ rights – in pursuit of optimal case outcomes.
For more information about what we can do to help you, please don’t hesitate to contact or call us at 254-781-4222 and schedule a free consultation today.