Criminal law: key concepts and applications

¶ … Criminal Law

Argument One: Sharon was intoxicated at the time of the crime and therefore should not be found guilty of assault or battery.

The argument that Sharon's act is not a criminal act due to the fact that she was intoxicated is most likely not a valid defense. Intoxication is a form of justification for a criminal act. Essentially what a justification defense is arguing is that although the individual did commit the act, or actus reas, due to their intoxication they lacked the criminal mind, or mens reas.

Intoxication may be caused by any substance, whether it be drugs, alcohol, or medicine. Further, it may be raised as a defense whenever intoxication negates one of the elements of the crime. However, the law typically distinguishes between voluntary intoxication and involuntary intoxication.

Intoxication is voluntary if it is the result of the intentional taking without duress of a substance known to be intoxicating. In other words, if one is not forced into taking the intoxicating substance, it is considered to be voluntary. Voluntary intoxication is only a defense to specific intent crimes. Specific intent crimes require a purpose or knowledge. If the intoxication prevented the defendant from formulating the purpose or obtaining the knowledge, then the voluntary intoxication may be raised as a defense against a specific intent crime. An exception to the rule is that the defense is not available if the defendant purposely became intoxicated for the purpose of establishing the defense. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to other crimes involving malice, recklessness, negligence or strict liability. An assault is a specific intent crime. Battery is a general intent crime.

Intoxication is considered involuntary only if the intoxication results from the taking of an intoxicating substance without knowledge of its nature, under direct duress imposed by another, or pursuant to medical advice while unaware of the substance's intoxicating effect. Involuntary intoxication is a defense to all crimes.

Sharon became intoxicated voluntarily, thus she can only raise the defense of intoxication against the assault charge and not the battery charge. Assault requires the showing of an intent to commit a battery. If it can be shown that her intoxication prevented her from formulating the intent to hit her husband, then she has a valid defense. However, it is unlikely that an argument can be made that says the only reason Sharon hit her husband with the wine bottle was because of the intoxication, that by no means did she actually intend to hit him. This fact is made clear by the fact that she did in fact hit him, thus her intent is clear.

Argument Two: Sharon should not be charged with aggravated assault and battery, but only with simple assault and battery since no deadly weapon was used.

This argument will ultimately fail in court because it is simply not true. All jurisdictions define certain acts as aggravated batteries and/or assaults and thus punish them as felonies. Typically these aggravated factors include: the use of a deadly or dangerous weapon, an act that causes serious bodily injury, when the victim is a child woman or police officer, when the assault is done with the intent to commit rape, maim or murder.

According to the law a deadly weapon can be any ordinary object that may become a deadly weapon depending upon how it is used. Typically a weapon is considered to be deadly when it is used in a way that may inflict mortal or great bodily harm. Most statutes contain a "catch all" provision which give the courts room to expand the definition to include other implements as being deadly weapons. The question of whether the item can actually inflict such harm is not part of the determination. For example, an unloaded gun is usually designated as being a deadly weapon.

Although a wine bottle by itself is not a deadly weapon, when used in an assault the court will look to the way it was used over the actual type of item it is. In the case at hand, Sharon specifically used the bottle as a weapon. She picked it up and smashed it over his head. The result was that blood was spilled everywhere and emergency assistance was needed.

It is the act of using the glass bottle and hitting the husband over the head that makes the bottle a dangerous or deadly weapon. It is common knowledge that a glass wine bottle is a blunt object that can cause serious injury, especially when the blow is to another's head. Further, it is common knowledge that a glass wine bottle, when smashed against something, will most likely break into pieces of glass. It is common knowledge that these glass pieces may be sharp and are likely to cause great bodily harm to another. It is this common knowledge of these dangers, combined with Sharon's actual use of the bottle as a weapon, that make the glass bottle a dangerous weapon and thus an aggravating factor in her assault and/or battery charges.

A better argument would be to focus on the self-defense claim as a justification to Sharon's use of the wine bottle as a dangerous weapon. In order to raise this defense, Sharon most show that her use of force was non-deadly and that she was without fault and her use of force was to reasonable in light of the need to protect herself from the imminent use of unlawful force upon herself.

Definition of Battery and Assault:

Battery is an unlawful application of force to the person of another resulting in either bodily injury or an offensive touching. There is no requirement that a battery be intentional, it is sufficient that the defendant caused the application of force through criminal negligence. Further, the force used need not be applied directly to the victim. That is, it is sufficient if the force is applied by a force or substance put into motion by the defendant. A common example of this is causing a dog to attack a victim or causing a victim to digest a poisonous substance.

Simple battery is a misdemeanor. An example of a simple battery as the application of force is if John walks up to Jack and hits him. An example of a simple battery as an offensive touching is if John walks up to Jack and touches him in a non-forceful way but one that is offensive. In the case at hand, Sharon's hitting of her husband, by itself, is an example of a simple battery.

Most statutes define certain acts as aggravating circumstances, thus escalating the charge to aggravated battery. Typically these aggravating circumstances include: using a deadly weapon, which may be an ordinary object if used in a dangerous or deadly manner; the act causes serious bodily injury; or the victim is a child, woman or police officer.

An example of an aggravated battery would be if John approaches Jack, who is a police officer, and hit him in the face. Another example is if John approaches Jack, regardless of Jack's profession, and hits him with a baseball bat. In the case at hand, Sharon's use of the wine bottle to hit her husband is most likely an aggravating circumstance and thus an example of an aggravated battery.

Many jurisdictions recognize consent by the victim to the force or offensive touching as being a valid defense to a simple battery. For example, if one consents to a medical operation the performing surgery cannot later be charged with battery. Another example is if one incurs injuries in a consensual athletic contest, the person who caused the injury cannot be charged with battery.

In a majority of jurisdictions, an assault is defined as either an attempt to commit a batter or the intentional creation (other than by mere word) of a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the victim of imminent bodily harm. Some jurisdictions, however, limit assault to an attempt to commit a battery.

Simple assault is a misdemeanor. An example of a simple assault is if John walks up to Jack, gets ready to hit Jack, but Jack ducks and John's swing misses him. Another example is if John walks up to Jack with a gun and threatens to shoot him in the leg. In the case at hand, Sharon's husband's act of standing up before her, clenching his fist and stating, "I've had it with you. I'm going to shut you up right now!" is most likely an example of a simple assault. Although words alone are not enough to be held as an assault, the combination of her husband's words and his act of standing up and clenching his fist are enough to put a reasonable person in apprehension of being the victim of a battery.