Hill v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the state bears the burden of proving that a defendant’s conduct was not justified or excused in a murder prosecution
• stating that once self-defense has been raised, the State has \the burden of proving absence of justification or excuse for the homicide\
• “[T]he defendant’s belief in the necessity of using force in self-defense must be reasonable.”
• “Without 15 doubt, the burden of proving absence of justification or excuse for the homicide resides 16 with the state.”
• rejecting the “imperfect self-defense” theory
• rejecting the \imperfect self-defense\ theory

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Mitchell v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2008-09-18· cited 103×
• Daniel v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2003-11-03· cited 83×
• Pineda v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2004-05-04· cited 24×
• Frederic Dixon v. Brian Williams, Sr.
  Ninth Circuit· 2014-04-30· cited 23×
• Barone v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1993-08-25· cited 14×
• Frederic Dixon v. Brian Williams, Sr.
  Ninth Circuit· 2014-06-11

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Flannel
  California Supreme Court· 1979-11-13· cited 712×
• State v. Tuzon
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1978-01-09· cited 40×
• Kelso v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1979-01-15· cited 33×
• St. Pierre v. State
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1980-12-17· cited 16×
• People v. Travis
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1976-11-29· cited 12×