Friday, September 14, 2012

State v. Abbott case brief

  • State v Abbott- there was a fight b/w Scarano and ∆. A jury could find Scarano as the aggressor. His dad joined the fight armed w/ a hatchet, and his mom w/ a knife. All of the Scarano’s were hit w the hatchet. ∆ claimed that they were hit while struggling for the hatchet. A jury could find that ∆ intentionally inflicted the blows.
      • A person has a duty to retreat before using deadly force to defend himself, but he need only retreat where he knows that he can do so w/ complete safety.
      • The burden is on the ∆ to produce evidence to support the defense.
        • The state has the burden or proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense is not true.
        • One need not retreat before using non-deadly force.
        • No retreat” advocates The manly thing is to hold one’s ground and society should not demand what smacks of cowardice
      • You must retreat when you can do so w/ complete safety (believes v. knows degree of confidence)
        • When deciding if someone knows it you must look to the totality of the circumstances
        • complete safety”- can you stand your ground and kill if you think that if you run away he will throw a twig at you

No comments:

Post a Comment

Exploring Career Paths: What Can You Do with a Juris Doctor Degree?

Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...