United States v. Bailey
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
585 F.2d 1087 (1978)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Three prisoners (defendants) escaped from a federal jail. The prisoners were located and charged with the crime of escape. The prisoners testified that they had feared for their personal safety if they stayed in the jail because they had received beatings from the guards, they had not received adequate medical care, and the facility was a firetrap that had recently suffered multiple fires. The prisoners argued that because they had escaped only to preserve their personal safety, (1) the escape was justified as the lesser of two evils and (2) they had lacked the mens rea, i.e., criminal intent, to commit the crime of escape. At trial, the district court relied on the Lovercamp test. This test allowed a defendant to assert a necessity defense to a prison-escape charge only if the defendant (1) had faced immediate harm inside the prison, (2) could not get relief from prison officials, (3) could not get relief from the courts, (4) did not harm any innocent people while escaping, and (5) reported to officials once safe from the immediate threat. Because the three prisoners here had not reported to officials after escaping, the district court did not let the jury consider the prisoners’ necessity defense. The prisoners were convicted of the crime of escape. On appeal, the prisoners argued that the jury should have been allowed to consider their necessity defense.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wright, C.J.)
Dissent (Wilkey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.