A Legal Justification

LawInfo.com National Registry of Lawyers and Consumer Legal Resources A justification based on a public obligation applies to any person who is required or authorized by law to act in accordance with a judgment, court order or legal proceeding. A defendant may invoke the justification of the public duty if he reasonably considers that his conduct was necessary to assist a public servant in the performance of his official duties. The justification for public duty does not normally include the right to use lethal force. Madness is a legal term, not a medical term. It refers to any insensitivity of mind, mental defect or lack of reason that prevents people from distinguishing good from evil and understanding the consequences of their actions. Guilty defendants cannot be convicted of «insanity» because they believe that people should only be punished for their crimes if they could control their behavior and knew that what they were doing was wrong. Otherwise, it is inappropriate to hold people morally accountable for their criminal behavior. Abogado.com The #1 Spanish Legal Website for Consumers Most states recognize certain legal justifications. These justifications may include public duty, necessity, self-defence, defence of a third party, defence of property, and certain privileges over law enforcement officers, parents, teachers and guardians.

It is an age-old common law principle that trespassing can be justified in many cases. A man can justify what would otherwise have been an intrusion. For example, registration on someone else`s property in order to require the owner of the land to owe a debt owed to him or to withdraw property belonging to him is justified. Such an entry should be peaceful. The justification must be invoked in particular before the courts. The courts do not accept the justification put forward as evidence in the context of the general question plea. The justification objection, supported by evidence, constitutes a complete obstacle to the remedy. A justification is similar to a defence in that a defendant has the burden of addressing the issue and presenting evidence in support of the problem. The prosecution then has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant`s actions were not justified. The defendant is entitled to a jury order on the issues of justification raised by the evidence, even if the issues are inconsistent. The FindLaw Legal Dictionary – free access to more than 8260 definitions of legal terms. Search for a definition or browse our legal glossaries.

Reasoning is an acceptable reason for a court as to why the defendant did what he is accused of doing. In short, by justification, the accused shows and has a good legal reason in court to explain why he did what he is called to answer. For example, in a defamation lawsuit, a defense that shows that the defamation is true; in an act of bodily harm that demonstrates that the violence was necessary; and a good reason to leave, desert or not support the woman. A reason to commit an act that would otherwise constitute harm or an impeachable offence. Justification is a ground for committing an act that would otherwise constitute a wrong or an impeachable offence. Are you a lawyer? Visit our professional website » JUSTIFICATION. The act by which an accused party shows a good legal reason in court and maintains why he did what he is called to answer. 2.

The subject shall be taken into account by the examination, 1. What actions are justifiable. 2. Method of justification. 3. Its effects. 3.-1. The acts to be justified are those committed with an arrest warrant and those committed without a warrant. 1. As a general rule, an arrest or execution warrant issued by a competent court, whether good or bad, justifies the officer to whom it is addressed and who is legally obliged to execute it and constitutes full justification for the officer to obey his order. However, if the arrest warrant is not only countervailable but absolutely void, as in the absence of jurisdiction of the court that issued it, or because of the prerogative of the accused, as in the case of the arrest of an ambassador who cannot waive his privilege and immunity by submitting to arrest on the basis of such an arrest warrant, the agent is no longer entitled to it. 1 Bat.

240; cf. 4 Mass 232; 13 Masses. 286, 334; 14. Mass 210. 2. A person may justify many actions while acting without the permission of a court or judge. He may even rightly take the life of an aggressor by acting to defend himself, his wife, children and servant, or to protect his home when attacked with criminal intent, or even to protect his personal property. See Self-defense. A man can justify what would otherwise have been an intrusion, entering someone else`s country for various purposes; such as requiring a debt owed to him by the owner of the property in order to remove the objects belonging to him, but this entry must be peaceful; to exercise an intangible right; Ask for accommodation in a hostel. See 15 East, 615, note e; 2 Lill. Ab. 134; 15 Wine.

From. 31; Ham. N. pp. 48-66; Ab. by Dane. Index, h.t.; Entrance. It is an age-old common law principle that trespassing can be justified in many cases. So: One person can enter the country of another to kill a fox or otter that are beasts against common profit. 11 H.

VIII. 10. Thus, a house can be demolished when the adjacent house is on fire to avoid major destruction. 1 P.M. VIII. 16, b. Tua res agitur paries proximus ardet. Thus, the suburbs of a city can be demolished in wartime for the benefit of the Commonwealth. 8. Aufl. IV.

35, b. Thus, a man can invade his neighbor to build a rampart to defend the empire. 9 P.M. VIII. b. Thus, a house can be broken to arrest a criminal. 13 Ed. IV. 9, a; Doder.

Eng. Right. 219, 220. In a civil suit, a man may justify defamation or defamatory words by proving its truthfulness or because the defendant had the right, on the occasion, to write and publish the scriptures or to pronounce the words; For example, when defamatory words are found in a report or indictment of a congressional committee, or when words of a defamatory nature are spoken by a member during the legislative debate, or by a lawyer from the bar association, when he is properly informed by his client on the subject. See debate; defamation; Com. Dig. Pleader, 2 L 3 to 2 L 7. 4.-2. In general, the justification must be invoked in particular and cannot be relied on as evidence in the context of the plea raised in the general question.

5.-3. If the substantiation objection is supported by evidence, it is a complete impediment to action. Justification is an exception to the prohibition on the commission of certain offences. The justification may be a defense in a prosecution for a crime. If an act is justified, a person is not criminally responsible, although his or her act would otherwise constitute a criminal offence. For example, the intentional commission of a homicide would be considered murder. However, it is not considered a crime if it is committed in self-defence. In addition to self-defense, other means of justification defense are defense of others, defense of property, and necessity (usually it fails as a defense of civil disobedience because the protest could have been demonstrated without breaking the law).

[2] FindLaw.com Free and reliable legal information for consumers and legal professionals Justification based on an enforcement privilege means that a law enforcement officer has the right to use force against another person if he or she has reason to believe that the violence is necessary to carry out an arrest or search to assist in an arrest or search. to prevent an escape after an arrest or to help prevent an escape after an arrest.