State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a person can use “only the level of force reasonably necessary to prevent the bodily harm feared”
• stating that a particular location is part of a defendant’s dwelling depends on whether the defendant exercises exclusive possession and control over the area in question
• requiring an “honest belief . . . in imminent danger of . . . bodily harm” and no “reasonable possibility of retreat”
• stating the word “dwelling” within burglary statute’s definitional section is “broad enough to include an apartment hallway”
• declining to extend the castle doctrine to the hallway of defendant’s apartment building
• declining to extend the castle doctrine and stating that “if a person is outside his or her home and can safely retreat, then the person’s use of force is unreasonable as a matter of law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).