Skip to main content

Mayes v. State

Citations

  • 744 N.E.2d 390
  • 2001 Ind. LEXIS 217
  • 2001 WL 244107

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that it was the factfinder’s duty to determine whether there was an immediate causal connection between the defendant’s possession of an unlicensed firearm and the victim’s death
  • firing of five shots while the victim was on the ground refuted self-defense claim
  • holding issue properly submitted to jury
  • “A literal application of the contemporaneous crime exception would nullify claims for self-defense in a variety of circumstances and produce absurd results in the process.”
  • “A literal application of the contemporaneous crime exception would nullify claims for self-defense in a variety of circumstances and produce absurd results in the process.”
  • whether an “immediate causal connection” between the two crimes exists and bars a claim of self-defense is a question left to the factfinder

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rucker, Shepard, Sullivan, Dickson, Boehm

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

55 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

18 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.