Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Duress is probably the most controversial defense in criminal law theory. Neither its foundation nor its nature as a justification or mere excuse nor its limits achieves any consensus among criminal law academics. In this paper a foundation of the duress defense is presented that considers that its importance lies in the fact that it allows us to appeal to considerations of justice and fairness that can explain the decision to forgo punishment in circumstances when the conduct performed by the actor cannot be considered socially beneficial or correct according to an objective (impartial) assessment of the act. The proposed account of the defense will also help us understand why duress represents instances of excuse rather than of justification. Finally, a brief discussion of the differences between the necessity and duress defenses will be provided, as well as an analysis of the proper limits of the duress defense.
New Criminal Law Review – University of California Press
Published: Oct 1, 2008
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.