Justus v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

How courts have described this case

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

• holding there was clear error because the jury instructions “contravened the intent of the legislature”
• discussing heat of passion mitigator, in relation to crime of second degree murder
• “If a defendant lodges no objection to a trial court’s jury instruction, a plain error standard should be applied in reviewing the instruction.”
• facts raise the issue of retreat where wife killed husband with an ax instead of running out of bedroom
• “Thus, we conclude that the General Assembly intended for a jury to consider the issue of provocation after determining that a defendant is guilty of second-degree murder.”
• error in jury instruction is not harmless where the language of the instruction creates a reasonable probability that the jury could have been misled in reaching a verdict

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).