Legal Definitions - specific-intent defense

A specific-intent defense is a legal argument made by a person accused of a crime, claiming that they could not have possessed the particular mental state or purpose required for that specific offense. Many crimes require not just an act, but also a specific intent behind that act. If a defendant can show that, due to factors like severe intoxication, a mental health condition, or cognitive impairment, they were incapable of forming this precise intent at the time of the alleged crime, they may use this defense.

• Imagine a person, Alex, who consumes a large amount of alcohol and then wanders into an unlocked office building late at night. He falls asleep on a couch in the lobby. When discovered by security, he is charged with burglary. Burglary typically requires the specific intent to commit a felony (like theft) once inside the building. Alex's defense could be that he was so severely intoxicated that he had no specific intent to steal anything or commit any other crime; he merely stumbled in and passed out. He might argue he lacked the specific intent necessary for a burglary charge, even if he physically entered the building.

• Consider Ben, who is experiencing a severe psychotic episode and believes he is being attacked by invisible aliens. In a state of extreme delusion, he fires a gun into the air, and a stray bullet accidentally injures someone. He is charged with attempted murder. Attempted murder is a specific-intent crime, requiring the intent to kill a human being. Ben's defense could be that due to his mental illness, he was incapable of forming the specific intent to kill a person; he genuinely believed he was defending himself against non-human threats. This defense would argue he lacked the specific mental state required for attempted murder.

• Suppose Carla, a graphic designer, is asked by a client to create a mock-up of a new company letterhead, including a signature line for the CEO. Carla, without thinking, signs the CEO's name as part of the design process, intending only to create a realistic visual. Later, the client uses this mock-up in a way that leads to a forgery charge against Carla. Forgery is a specific-intent crime that requires the intent to defraud or deceive. Carla's defense would be that she never had the specific intent to defraud anyone; her only intent was to create a design mock-up. She would argue she lacked the specific intent to deceive, which is a core element of forgery.