Many criminal defense strategies focus on excluding evidence, providing alibis or otherwise creating a reasonable doubt about whether a defendant truly broke the law. The details of the allegations against the defendant directly influence the best defense strategy possible.
Those hoping to avoid criminal convictions sometimes work with their defense lawyers to develop affirmative defense strategies. They admit to engaging in certain conduct, but they claim that the circumstances mitigate their criminal culpability.
Why do some defendants choose to mount affirmative defenses instead of using a different approach?
The state may have strong evidence
Affirmative defense strategies are common in cases where the state has very convincing evidence that a crime occurred and that the defendant was the party involved in the incident. Instead of questioning the defendant’s identity, the goal is to change the narrative surrounding what occurred.
Claims of self-defense are perhaps the most common affirmative defense strategy. Individuals accused of violent crimes can invoke Florida’s self-defense statutes and assert that they acted to protect themselves or others from immediate threats.
Claims of duress or mental incapacity are also common affirmative defense strategies. In scenarios where there may be mitigating factors present and where the prosecution has security camera footage or testimony from multiple eyewitnesses, an affirmative defense strategy may be one of the best options available.
Reviewing the state’s case and the pending charges with a criminal defense attorney can help people understand their options. Affirmative defenses can change a story surrounding criminal charges and help to people prove that mitigating factors eliminate their criminal culpability for specific conduct.