People accused of serious criminal offenses often look for evidence to prove they didn’t break the law, like a reliable witness who can place them elsewhere when the crime occurred. They may also be able to present an affirmative defense.
Unlike a traditional criminal defense strategy that raises a reasonable doubt about whether a defendant broke the law or not, an affirmative defense strategy focuses on highlighting details about the crime that can mitigate the defendant’s criminal culpability.
Does the state have a strong case?
In scenarios where people are unlikely to prove they were elsewhere when a crime happened or there are no other potential suspects, an affirmative defense strategy may be the best option available. Instead of trying to prove that they didn’t do something that appears to violate the law, they can show that their conduct wasn’t actually criminal due to extenuating circumstances.
A claim of self-defense brought in response to violent criminal charges is perhaps the most common affirmative defense strategy. For example, when someone accused of assault or homicide can show that they acted not with the intent to cause harm but instead out of a desire to protect themselves, the lack of criminal intent could undermine the state’s case.
Affirmative defense strategies can also highlight a person’s lack of capacity or actions taken due to duress. The nature of the charges and the details of the situation determine whether or not an affirmative defense strategy is appropriate.
Reviewing pending violent criminal charges with an experienced criminal defense attorney can help people explore different strategies. An affirmative defense could be an effective response when the state has strong evidence connecting a defendant to a crime.
