State v. Carter
Idaho Supreme Court
1DissentShepard, Justice
My view of the record indicates insufficient evidence to support the conviction of Carter and hence I dissent.
The majority correctly indicates that a person has a right to use deadly force to defend his spouse and child as well as himself from the infliction of great bodily injury provided that he be under a reasonable apprehension of imminent harm and reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary to protect against this harm. I.C. § 18-4009; People v. Pierson, 2 Idaho 76, 3 P. 688 (1884). I believe there is no question, even in the mind of the majority, that Carter initially had the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. ErwinIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
- State v. WilsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1941
- People v. PiersonIdaho Supreme Court · 1884