Article by Michael H. Hoffheimer
This Article explores legislative resistance to codifying a general necessity or choice-of-evils defense. It documents the fact that the federal government and the majority of states have refused to enact any form of the necessity defense, while those states that have enacted some version of the defense impose significant restrictions that limit its availability. The Article argues that while the Model Penal Code's necessity defense retains a privileged position in academic discussions, the Code's version of the defense is in fact bad law almost everywhere. The Article links the Model Penal Code's lack of influence to the utilitarian law reform goals of the Code's drafters and their failure to appreciate the depth of judicial and popular opposition to the defense of necessity.
About the Author
Michael H. Hoffheimer. Professor of Law and Mississippi Defense Lawyers Association Distinguished Lecturer, University of Mississippi School of Law. B.A. 1977, The Johns Hopkins University; Ph.D. 1981, The University of Chicago; J.D. 1984, University of Michigan Law School.
Citation
82 Tul. L. Rev. 191 (2007)