Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sl8

(16,284 posts)
3. It sounds like the decision is limited to deadly weapons.
Thu Aug 1, 2024, 09:19 AM
Aug 2024
https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/Appellate/Supreme%20Court/Standard%20Opinions/OPA220432-073124.pdf

(highlighting mine)

[...]

CHUTICH, Justice.
This case presents a narrow issue of first impression—whether the duty to retreat
when reasonably possible, a judicially created element of self-defense long established by our court, applies to a person who claims they were acting in self-defense when they
committed the felony offense of second-degree assault-fear with a dangerous weapon. For this decision, a dangerous weapon is limited to a “device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or great bodily harm.”1 Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subd. 6 (2022).

[...]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Minnesota»MN Supreme Court duty to ...»Reply #3