State v. King
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BERCH, Chief Justice.
¶ 1 The parties have asked us to decide whether a defendant in a criminal case must have acted solely from a reasonable belief that he faced immediate physical danger to qualify for a self-defense jury instruction. We hold that the governing statute does not impose such a requirement. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. (A.R.S.) § 13-404 (2010).
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶ 2 Adam Scott King claims that a homeless person threw a full two-liter bottle of water at him, hitting him in the head. In response, King struck the victim several times and kicked him in the side. The…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gemstar Ltd. v. Ernst & YoungArizona Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. LandriganArizona Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. DumaineArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. GomezArizona Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. NoriegaArizona Supreme Court · 1984
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Jerry Charles HolleArizona Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. DelahantyArizona Supreme Court · 2011
- State of Arizona v. Andy Daniel AlmeidaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- State of Arizona v. Nelson E. NottinghamCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- State v. BowsherArizona Supreme Court · 2010
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.