The Commonest Mistakes of Fact or Law Defense in Criminal Cases

The Criminal Defense of Mistake 

It has been observed in multiple situations that a criminal defendant may wish to argue that he or she never had the intention to commit a crime. They argue that the criminal act that occurred was a result of a mistake of facts regarding the circumstances of the crime. At times they cite misunderstandings regarding the law during the crime. Such mistakes of fact apply to a wide range of criminal activities. However, mistakes of law are only rarely allowed as full defenses to criminal conduct. 

Mistakes of Fact 

If a defendant during criminal defense in Anaheim argues that he or she misunderstood some fact that negates an element of the crime, then mistakes of fact arise. For example, Daniel maybe charged with larceny. However, he believed that the property, he took was legally his. This misunderstanding negates any intent to deprive another legitimate heir of the property. But an important qualification is that this mistake of fact has to be honest enough and reasonable too. Accordingly, a defendant cannot later claim that he or she was mistaken though he or she was very much aware of the situation. Similarly, the mistake must be one that would seem reasonable to a judge or jury. If the same individual was continuously told that the property was not his, and he could not take it, it would no longer be logical for him to have mistakenly assumed that he could inherit the property lawfully. 

Mistakes of fact apply to a wide range of crimes. A few crimes may set forth that mistake of fact is a defense. Else, if the criminal defendant can establish that the mistake reasonably negated an element of the crime, the defense will usually be applicable and it should absolve the defendant of liability. 

Mistakes and Strict Liability 

A mistake isn’t a defense to a strict liability offense. For instance, Gabriel stays in a jurisdiction in which the sale of alcohol to minors is a strict liability offense. He does his best to check identification whenever selling alcohol at his store. Rose, age 17, presents Gabriel with a convincing fake I.D. and also appears to be more than 21 years of age. If Gabriel sells alcohol to Rose, he could be held responsible for selling alcohol to a minor, even though he reasonably and honestly believed that buyer was old enough to purchase it. 

Mistake of Law 

A mistake of law is a defense that the criminal defendant failed to understand or was oblivious to the law as it existed at the time. Usually, the onus is placed on individuals to know the laws of their state or community. Accordingly, this defense only applies in very few circumstances. For example, while a defendant can never claim that he was not aware that murder was a crime, he may be able to argue with the help of his criminal lawyer in Anaheim that he was not aware of some unclear traffic law. 

Categorically, a mistake of law can be used as a defense only in four circumstances: 

• 
  

• If the law is yet to be published. 
• If the defendant depending on a law or statute that was later overturned or deemed unconstitutional; 
• If the defendant depended on a judicial decision that was later overruled;  
• If the defendant depended on an interpretation by an applicable official. 

Moreover, the defendant’s dependence on any of these sources must have been reasonable, similar to the mistake of fact. Accordingly, a defendant cannot claim that he believed a case from 200 years ago when it is obvious that there have been subsequent amendments in the law. 

It is also crucial to remember that, though dependence on an interpretation of an official may include judges or federal or state agencies, it does not include dependence on the statements of a private attorney. So, it is important to ensure that any attorney from whom you obtain advice is knowledgeable and reliable. 

Conclusion 

The key fact is that ignorance of the law is very rarely a defense. Hire the best lawyer in California if you face any such legal hassle.