Charles Anderson was convicted of false imprisonment by means of violence after he dragged his intoxicated former girlfriend, Sylvia Olsen, out of the Chicken Ranch Casino while she was fighting and resisting him because she did not want to leave. Olsen later explained that she wanted the charges dropped against Anderson because they had just broken up over her gambling problem the day before and she and Anderson had made an agreement a month earlier that "[i]f he caught me in the casino, he was to take me home." Anderson knew Olsen had a limited amount of money that she was to use for her son's birthday and that she was gambling it away. Although Olsen was clearly not consenting to being dragged out of the casino at the time that act occurred, Anderson argues that he was entitled to a mistake of fact instruction on the issue whether or not he reasonably believed Olsen was consenting to his actions based on their earlier agreement (See People v. Anderson, 2008 WL 570798 (Cal.App. 5 Dist. 2008).

Explain whether he was entitled to such an instruction?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In the case of People v Anderson the court considered whether Charles Anderson was entitled to a mis... View the full answer