ASebilangan numberkesalahan ofditakrifkan offencessebagai aresuatu definedkeadaan asatau a situation or contextkonteks, e.g.,umpamanya "beingkedapatan founddi withindalam enclosedkawasan premisesyang dipagari" andatau "being drunk in charge of[[mabuk]] asewaktu motormemandu vehicle[[kereta]]". TheseKesemua areini usuallybiasanya strictdianggap liabilitysebagai and[[liabiliti aketat]] convictiondan cansabitan beboleh sustainedditerima evenwalaupun thoughorang anyang accuseddituduh didtidak notbertindak actdengan insukarela apada whollykeseluruhannya. voluntary manner.Oleh Henceitu, ifjika aseorang persontertidur fallsdi asleepsuatu insudut a[[perpustakaan]] quietyang cornersunyi ofdan atidak librarysengaja andterkunci isoleh lockedseorang in by inadvertent staffkakitangan, thekesalahan offencedilakukan willtetapi beperingkat committed,kesalahan butyang theamat relativelyrendah lowakan leveldibayangkan ofdalam fault could be reflected in the sentencehukumannya. InDalam ''Martin vlwn StateNegara'' (1944) 31 Ala App 334 17 So 2d 427. Martin wasditangkap arresteddari atrumahnya homedan anddibawa takenke ontolebuh theraya highwayoleh bypegawai-pegawai policepolis officers, where he showedketika signsdia ofmenunjukkan beingtanda-tanda drunkmabuk. HisSabitannya convictionuntuk forkesalahan beingmabuk drunkdibatalkan onkerana aketibaannya publicke highwaylebuh wasraya quashedbukan becausedilakukannya hissecara arrival on the highway was not voluntarysukarela. WhereasSebaliknya, indalam ''R vlwn Larsonneur'' (1933) 24 Cr. App. R. 74 Larsonneur, aseorang French[[warganegara]] citizen,[[Perancis]] wasdiserahkan servedperintah withyang anmemerlukannya ordermeninggalkan requiringUnited herKingdom todan leavetidak thedibenarkan UK and not returnkembali. InsteadSebagai ofganti returninguntuk tokembali Franceke Perancis, shedia membuat travelledperjalanan toke Ireland, anddan wasdiusir deportedbalik back toke England wheredi shemana wasdia arrestedditangkap forkerana "beingdidapati found in thedi United Kingdom". TheMahkamah CourtRayuan ofJenayah Criminalmemutuskan Appealbahawa heldkeadaan-keadaan thatdi themana involuntarydia circumstanceskembali underdengan whichtidak shesukarela was returned"betul-betul weretidak "perfectly immaterialpenting". InDalam ''Winzar vlwn ChiefKetua ConstableKonstabel dari of Kent'' (1983) akhbar ''The Times'', 28 MarchMac 1983. where the charge was one of being "found drunk on a highway" contrary to s12 Licensing Act 1872, Winzar had originally been found drunk in a hospital and asked to leave. When he failed to do so, police officers removed him to their patrol car, which was parked on the highway outside, and then charged him with the offence in question. Upholding the conviction, Goff LJ. pointed out that a distinction would otherwise have to be drawn between the drunk who leaves a restaurant when asked to do so and the drunk who is forcibly ejected after refusing to leave. If both are arrested in the street shortly afterwards, it would be wrong for the courts to regard the former as guilty and the latter as not. But the U.S. approach of [[abuse of process]] might prevail if the police were to drag a person from his own bed and into the street before charging him with being found drunk on a highway.
