Carl v. State

OPINION

By the Court,

Springer, J.:

Appellant Carl stands convicted of second degree murder. Carl’s principal claim of error is that the trial court’s instructions on self-defense impermissibly shifted the burden of proof to him. The Due Process clause of the United States Constitution protects an accused against conviction except on proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 (1970).

The instructions in question, numbered 31, 32, and 33, are set out in the margin. 1 The instructions define self-defense and…