finding self-defense inapplicable when the defendant proceeded into a house after the victim, who was holding a gun, had already closed the door as the defendant approached the house
How later courts described this case
- finding self-defense inapplicable when the defendant proceeded into a house after the victim, who was holding a gun, had already closed the door as the defendant approached the house
- noting that, generally, a defendant is not entitled to use any more force than is necessary to defend himself or herself
- opinion by Reilly, J.
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Abrogated on other grounds by People v. Reese, 491 Mich. 127 (2012)
508 N.W.2d 184, 187 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993), abrogated on other grounds by People v. Reese, 815 N.W.2d 85
The opinion
Michael J. Kelly, J.
(concurring). I would have preferred to affirm the conviction and sentence on the basis of the implied rejection of defendant’s self-defense claim, however labeled. I concur in remanding the case to permit the trial court to address the claim of "imperfect self-defense.’’ The defendant is entitled to an express, articulated treatment of that slippery and undeveloped doctrine by the trial court, because his appeal of that issue may attract the attention of the Supreme Court._