State v. Barr case brief summary
565 P.2d 526 (1977)
CASE FACTS
Defendant argued that the trial court erred in refusing to allow his defense that the killing was justified under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-462(4) because he was attempting to apprehend a fleeing felon.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
565 P.2d 526 (1977)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant appealed the judgment of a
trial court (Arizona), which convicted him of voluntary manslaughter
while armed with a gun. The conviction arose out of the fatal
shooting of the victim as the victim and several companions left
defendant's yard after attempting to steal some wooden chairs valued
at less than $ 5.CASE FACTS
Defendant argued that the trial court erred in refusing to allow his defense that the killing was justified under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-462(4) because he was attempting to apprehend a fleeing felon.
DISCUSSION
- The trial court refused such instructions because no felony was committed, as the yard was neither "enclosed" nor "commercial" within the meaning of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-302, which defined burglary, and because the elements of a burglary were not present and that, thus, the defense could not be invoked.
- The higher court agreed.
- A "commercial yard" was not within the statute unless it was fully enclosed and its enclosing structure was erected mainly for the purpose of protecting property and not merely as a boundary or for aesthetic considerations.
- Defendant argued that the trial court erred by refusing to give certain requested instructions on the right of self-defense.
- The court found no error because where the instructions given were correct and fairly stated the law, it was not error to refuse to single out a particular element of the case for special instruction.
- Lastly, defendant's sentence was within the limitations for the lesser offense and could not be disturbed.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment