Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Riley

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 13, 1999No. 65845-5Published

1ConcurrenceTalmadge, J.

(concurring) — The trial court properly instructed the jury by giving the “aggressor instruction,” WPIC 16.04, along with instructions on self-defense, because the jury had to decide between competing stories of who instigated the conflict, and because there is evidence supporting the view the defendant started the conflict. 11 Washington Pattern Jury Instructions: Criminal (2d ed. 1994). I write separately to take issue with the majority’s assertion that words alone can never support the giving of an aggressor instruction.

Riley belatedly raises a First Amendment argument in this case…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Smith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1998
  3. State v. MierzWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Scott v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1925
  5. State v. HawkinsWashington Supreme Court · 1916

6 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