 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Martin2/17/1993
the back because "I didn't want to give him a chance." Id. The other officer said that the defendant denied that the victim threatened him and stated that he did
not see that the victim had a weapon. Id. The court said the "mere factual reference of Officer Higgins to [the victim's] movement away from the defendant in order to reach into his van," id., was not, under the circumstances, sufficient to permit the jury reasonably to conclude "that the defendant subjectively believed at the time that Drake was about to commit an aggressive act or that the defendant subjectively believed the use of force was necessary for his own self defense." Id. at 363.
We hold that where the defendant's subjective belief at a particular time must be shown to generate a defense, only evidence bearing directly on that issue will suffice. Evidence of the defendants subjective belief at some earlier time will not do.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS REVERSED. CASE REMANDED TO THAT COURT WITH DIRECTIONS TO REINSTATE THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR WICOMICO COUNTY.
COSTS IN THIS COURT AND IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS TO BE PAID BY THE RESPONDENT.
Disposition
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS REVERSED. CASE REMANDED TO THAT COURT WITH DIRECTIONS TO REINSTATE THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WICOMICO COUNTY. COSTS IN THIS COURT AND IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS TO BE PAID BY THE RESPONDENT.
ING OPINION BY Eldridge, J.
Eldridge, J. dissenting:
For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the Court of Special appeals, I would affirm the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Maryland DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|