McGee v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
1DissentMatthews, Justice
I agree with today's holding that the state had the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that McGee lacked any reasonable ground to believe his act was justified. I nonetheless dissent because the facts viewed most favorably to him did not support a necessity defense. The superior court's error as to the burden of proving the defense was therefore harmless.
The elements of necessity are: "1) the act charged must have been done to prevent a significant evil; 2) there must have been no adequate alternative; 3) the harm caused must not have been disproportionate to the *1264harm avoided." 1 As…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- United States v. Nelson-RodriguezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2003
- United States v. Charles Odell PerrinCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Roberto Cervantes-FloresCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Albert B. Brooke v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Baier v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1995
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.