Evaluate the validity of Peterson’s arguments and state whether he is likely to succeed in his appeal on the basis of his defense of self-defense under general principles.

Show all

Evaluate the validity of Peterson’s arguments and state whether he is likely to succeed in his appeal on the basis of his defense of self-defense under general principles.

Read carefully and then provide a decision in the following hypothetical case.  Make sure you provide a thorough discussion of the legal principles involved, and the case law upon which you are relying to support your decision.

Charles Keitt, the deceased, and two friends drove in Keitt’s car to the alley in the rear of Peterson’s house to remove the windshield wipers from the latter’s wrecked car.  While Keitt was doing so, Peterson came out of the house into the back yard to protest.

After a verbal exchange, Peterson went back into the house, obtained a pistol and returned to the yard.  In the meantime, Keitt had reseated himself in his car, and he and his companions were about to leave.

Upon his reappearance in the yard, Peterson paused briefly to load the pistol.  “If you move,” he shouted to Keitt, “I will shoot.”  He walked to a point in the yard slightly inside a gate in the rear fence and, pistol in hand, said, “If you come in here I will kill you.” Keitt alighted from his car, took a few steps toward Peterson and exclaimed, “What the hell do you think you are going to do with that?”  Keitt then made an about-face, walked back to his car and got a lug wrench.  With the wrench in a raised position, Keitt advanced toward Peterson, who stood with the pistol pointed toward him.  Peterson warned Keitt not to “take another step” and, when Keitt continued onward, shot him in the face from a distance of about ten feet.  Keitt died instantly.

Peterson was indicted for second-degree murder, and convicted by a jury of voluntary manslaughter as a lesser-included offense.  He appeals, claiming that the judge twice erred in the instructions given to the jury in relation to his claim that the homicide was committed in self-defense. One error alleged was an instruction that the jury might consider whether Peterson was the aggressor in the altercation that immediately preceded the homicide.

The other error was an instruction that a failure by Peterson to retreat, if he could have done so without jeopardizing his safety, might be considered as a circumstance bearing on the question whether he was justified in using the amount of force which he did.

Peterson contends that there was no evidence that he either caused or contributed to the conflict and that he was justified in using deadly force to save himself from imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.

Evaluate the validity of Peterson’s arguments and state whether he is likely to succeed in his appeal on the basis of his defense of self-defense under general principles.  Would your answer be different with reference to the relevant MPC provisions?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search the web for case studies that involve metals or pesticides and mitigation measures then write a brief summary of a case study that interests you.
August 5, 2017
Discuss how the new service model will change the way healthcare providers work and the implications for patients.
August 5, 2017