Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 5/8/1991

Commonwealth v. Samuel

Citations

590 A.2d 1245
527 Pa. 298
1991 Pa. LEXIS 112

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

providing that mere display of gun in a non-threatening manner, as opposed to drawing or firing the weapon, was insufficient to establish that the defendant provoked the encounter and forfeited his right to assert self-defense under Section 505(b)(2)(i)
finding that where a defendant introduces, but then removes, a weapon from the conflict, and the victim delays before retaliating, the introduction of a weapon does not constitute provocation as a matter of law
holding burden on Commonwealth to disprove claim of self-defense
a defendant forfeits right to self-defense if the provocation doctrine applies
“in order to find that the defendant had forfeited his right to self-defense pursuant to the doctrine of provocation, the facts must support the statutory requirement that the defendant, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Zappala, Papadakos, Cappy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.