Under common law, the necessity defense is available if the defendant reasonably believes the crime is necessary to prevent a greater harm. It is not a defense to homicide.

• A. Homicide
• B. Non-homicide offenses
• C. Any crime
• D. Only for misdemeanors

Answer: (B)

The key idea here is the necessity defense: a defendant may avoid criminal liability when they reasonably believe that committing the crime is necessary to prevent a greater imminent harm, and there are no lawful alternatives. The harm prevented must be greater than the harm caused, and the response used must be proportional and reasonable.

Under common law, this defense is recognized for non-homicide offenses—crimes where the defendant’s conduct is to avoid a greater evil other than taking a life. However, it is not a defense to homicide. Society generally does not excuse killing as a way to prevent harm, except in situations described by separate doctrines like self-defense, where there is an imminent deadly threat and the force used is proportional. So, the statement that the necessity defense is available to non-homicide offenses but not to homicide is the correct understanding.