Legal Opinion

EDWARD BROWN v. UNITED STATES

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided May 26, 2016No. 13-CF-1234PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EASTERLY, Associate Judge:

This court has long recognized the common-law defense that authorizes an individual to protect or repossess personal property using nondeadly force and that correspondingly prohibits the use of deadly force for this purpose. Deadly force is understood to include force likely to cause “serious bodily harm.” In this case, we consider whether the trial court should have, at Edward Brown’s request, defined “serious bodily harm” for the jury using the same definition this court adopted for “serious bodily injury” in the context of aggravated assault. See Nixon v. United…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Elaine Jones v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
  2. ANDRE v. FISHER, JR. v. GORDON L. LATNEYDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. ANDRE v. FISHER, JR. v. GORDON L. LATNEYDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016
  4. Akinbi v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2024
  5. BERNARD FLEMING v. UNITED STATESDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016

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