NCJ Number
113124
Journal
Brooklyn Law Review Volume: 53 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1988) Pages: 1149-1168
Date Published
1988
Length
20 pages
Annotation
There are various standards that are used to determine whether the use of deadly force is justified under particular circumstances: at one end of the spectrum is the reasonable-man standard; at the other end is the purely subjective standard that requires a good faith belief on the part of the actor that the act was warranted.
Abstract
Prior to 1965, New York Penal Law regarding the self-defense justification was generally interpreted by the courts in terms of an objective reasonableness standard. Following revisions in 1965, some courts have adhered to an objective standard, while others have applied a subjective standard. In People vs. Goetz, the court of appeals employed a hybrid of these two standards. While the court's analysis is flawed in terms of the 1965 revision and is inconsistent with prior court decisions, the hybrid position more accurately reflects a defendant's degree of culpability than would a purely objective standard. This hybrid standard can potentially meet the concerns of advocates of both objective and subjective standards, while also serving the goals of criminal law. The criminal law intended that there be a determination of the defendant's intent and subsequent blameworthiness. The hybrid standard allows the defendant's state of mind and the circumstances to be assessed in accordance with this intent. 96 footnotes.