United States v. DeChristopher

On appeal, the Tenth Circuit upheld the conviction, holding that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction and that the district court did not err in disallowing the individual from presenting the necessity defense, holding that the first prong, that there was no legal alternative to violating the law, was not present in this case given that the individual could have taken other steps, such as filing a lawsuit to stop the issuance of the leases.

Filing Year For Action

A federal court in Utah held that an individual will not be allowed to present the “necessity defense” in a criminal proceeding. The individual was indicted for submitting several bids for oil and gas drilling leases on federal land that he did not intend to pay for.  He argued that he did so to prevent the leases from being used in a way that would  worsen the effects of climate change. The court held that the government’s motion in limine to prevent the individual from using the defense should be granted because the individual did not meet the criteria for allowing such a defense.

Filing Year For Action