Defensa por Coacción y Órdenes Militares en Pensilvania

Explicación Simple

Si alguien comete un delito porque lo amenazaron con hacerle daño, puede usar eso como defensa. Pero si esa persona se metió en problemas porque actuó imprudentemente, no podrá usar esa defensa.

Es como si un niño hace algo malo porque otro niño más grande le dice que lo haga bajo amenaza. Si el niño menor se metió en problemas porque buscó pelear, no puede decir que lo obligaron.

Ejemplo Práctico

Imagina que Juan está en una fiesta y un grupo de personas le dice que robe algo del coche de alguien o le harán daño. Juan, asustado, decide hacerlo. Sin embargo, si Juan supo que esa fiesta era peligrosa y decidió ir de todos modos, podría no tener una defensa válida por coacción.

Texto Original del Estatuto (Inglés)

18 Pa.C.S. 309 - Duress (a) General rule.--It is a defense that the actor engaged in the conduct charged to constitute an offense because he was coerced to do so by the use of, or a threat to use, unlawful force against his person or the person of another, which a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist. (b) Exception.--The defense provided by subsection (a) of this section is unavailable if the actor recklessly placed himself in a situation in which it was probable that he would be subjected to duress. The defense is also unavailable if he was negligent in placing himself in such a situation, whenever negligence suffices to establish culpability for the offense charged. Cross References.Section 309 is referred to in section 9711 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure). 18 Pa.C.S. 310 - Military Orders § 310. Military orders. It is a defense that the actor, in engaging in the conduct charged to constitute an offense, does no more than execute an order of his superior in the armed services which he does not know and cannot reasonably be expected to know to be unlawful. 18 Pa.C.S. 1992 - Amendment Cross References.Section 311 is referred to in section 2607 of this title.