Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Etienne

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 21, 2011No. Nos. 2004-833; 2006-919Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDalianis, C.J.

Because I believe that the trial court erred in instructing the jury regarding the amount of force the defendant was permitted to use in self-defense or defense of others, I respectfully dissent from Part 11(A) of the majority’s thoughtful opinion. I concur, however, in the remainder of the opinion.

The trial court instructed the jury, in pertinent part, as follows:

The defendant must reasonably believe that the amount of force he used was necessary for self-defense or defense of others. A person is not permitted to use excessive force in self-defense, only a reasonable amount of force. The…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. PuglieseSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1980
  2. State v. KousounadisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2009
  3. State v. Elementis Chemical, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2005
  4. State v. WarrenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2002
  5. State v. McKeownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2009

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API