{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

CB Shuck v. State - 1 He must be free from fault in brining...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Shuck v. State 349 A.2d 378 (Md. App. 1975) Fact: Procedural Facts: Operative Facts: Defendant was riding in a car with his friend. His friend then raced a car, and while the two cars were racing, the racer exited, and the defendant followed, accidently cutting off a trucker who got really pissed. The racer spoke with the friend, and the trucker blocked off the entrance of where they was (only 1 entrance). The trucker than went to the friend and started to hit him and call him out. The friend then started to fight the trucker, and the racer tried to break them up. As the three was fighting, the defendant tried to pull out the racer, but the racer than punched him a few times. The defendant than went and got a bat, and swung it twice. 1 st time hitting the trucker, and injuring him slightly, and the second time at the racer, which killed him. Issue: Broad Question: Narrow Question: Does the defendant have perfect self-defense? Rule: In order to have a perfect defense of self defense to homicide
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 1) He must be free from fault in brining on the difficulty with his adversary 2) He must reasonably believe ( though he need not correctly believe) both a. His adversary will, unless forcibly prevented, immediately inflict upon him a fatal or serious bodily injury b. That he must use deadly force upon the adversary to prevent him from inflicting such an injury If one who is not his adversary with these two actual and reasonable belief in his mind, his homicide is justified, and he is guilty of no crime. (not murder, not manslaughter, but no crime). Rational: Since the defendant was free from fault in brining on the difficulty with his adversary, he did not believe this fight would be fatal or cause serious bodily injury. Holding: No, the defendant has an imperfect Self-defense claim. This claim if the defense of self defense isn’t completed. And can reduce a murder charge not to a “no crime” but to a manslaughter. Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online