• Home
  • Practice Areas
  • Attorneys
  • Videos
  • Offices
  • Testimonials
  • Process
  • About
  • Resource Center
    • California Inmate Location
    • California Criminal Case Search
    • California Laws, Codes & Statutes
    • California Rehabilitation, Treatment and Counseling Centers
    • Los Angeles
    • Orange County
    • Riverside County
    • San Bernardino
    • San Diego
    • Ventura

OR


Payment Plans Available in Some Cases*

Home » Practice Areas » Battery Overview – CPC 242 » Battery Defenses

More California Battery Overview – CPC 242 information

  • Battery Overview – CPC 242
    • Battery Prosecution
    • Battery Defenses
    • Battery Sentencing
    • Battery Faqs
    • Client Testimonials: Battery

Battery Defenses – Penal Code Section 242

Self-Defense or Defense of Another

Self-Defense is a defense to battery. The defendant is not guilty of battery if:

  1. The defendant reasonably believed that he or someone else was in imminent danger of suffering bodily injury or was imminent danger of being touched unlawfully;
  2. The defendant reasonably believed that the immediate use of force was necessary to defend against that danger; AND
  3. The defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend against that danger.

It is important to note that belief in future harm is not sufficient for a claim of self-defense or defense of others, not matter how great or how likely the harm is believed to be.

Defendant Lacked the Requisite Intent to Commit Battery

Under California Battery law, the defendant must have committed the act willfully. It is not sufficient for a conviction for battery that a person acted accidentally. In order to be convicted the prosecutor must prove the defendant’s requisite intent to apply force to the alleged victim.

Often whether an accused is found guilty or not guilty of an battery offense will depend upon the issue of the defendant’s “specific intent” upon entering the location in question. This means that the freedom of our clients often depends upon the “circumstantial” evidence we are able to present to show that our client did not have the required specific intent to be convicted under California Penal Code Section 242.

Intoxication

Intoxication may be a viable defense to Battery under California Penal Code Section 242. Evidence to establish the intent is almost always circumstantial. The defendant may offer evidence of intoxication on the issue whether he or she actually formed the required specific intent.

Consent

In some cases we can show that the alleged victim actually consented to the battery. That is, if we can show that the contact was invited or even welcomed, then our client will not be found guilty of battery.

Parental Right to Discipline a Child

Parents are allowed to use physical force to discipline their children under California Penal Code Section 273a(a). However, the force must (1) be “reasonable”, and (2) not be excessive under the circumstances.

More California Battery Overview – CPC 242 information

  • Battery Overview – CPC 242
    • Battery Prosecution
    • Battery Defenses
    • Battery Sentencing
    • Battery Faqs
    • Client Testimonials: Battery

Related Articles

An error has occurred, which probably means the feed is down. Try again later.
  • HOW CAN WE HELP YOU

    Please fill out the following form and
    we will contact you as soon as possible

    1. Captcha
     

    cforms contact form by delicious:days

  • What Our Clients Say

    Attempted Battery on a Cop

    I was in a state of shock when I was arrested for attempted battery on a police officer and resisting arrest. I knew I was innocent of these crimes and knew that I needed to find the right criminal defense attorney to help me fight my case…I knew my attorney believed in me and my case and would fight the charges to the bitter end…the District Attorney dismissed all of the charges against me…

    More Testimonials

  • Videos

    TV & RADIO APPEARANCES

    More Videos
  • Latest Firm News

    BLOG POST

    February 10,2012,Criminal Defense Attorney

    Facebook De-Friending Results in Double Murder

    In what is one of the most senseless crimes we’ve come across in a long time, two men are currently in custody for murdering two people over a “de-friending” on Facebook. Marvin Enoch "Buddy" Potter Jr. and Jaime Lynn Curd have been charged with the murder of a young Tennessee couple who de-friended Potter’s daughter on the popular social networking site. Curd’s murder defense lawyer h.....

    Visit Our Blog
  • Wallin & Klarich

    Social Links

    • Digg
    • Facebook
    • Delicious
    • Stumble
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • Technorati favorites
    • Reddit
    • Mixx
    • Newsvine

Free Legal Consultation!

  1. Captcha
 

cforms contact form by delicious:days

    • Home
    • Practice Areas
    • Attorneys
    • Locations
    • Criminal Process
    • Videos
    • About Us
    • Espanol

California Criminal Defense Lawyer Disclaimer: The legal information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice, nor the formation of a lawyer or attorney client relationship. Any results set forth herein are based upon the facts of that particular case and do not represent a promise or guarantee. Please contact a criminal attorney for a consultation on your particular legal matter. This web site is not intended to solicit clients for matters outside of the state of California. © 2010 Wallin & Klarich - All rights reserved. California Criminal Defense Lawyers and DUI Defense Attorneys serving all areas of Southern California.

Attorney Referral Link | Sitemap | Design by BPIZZY