State v. Leaphart

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that court did not err in concluding that woman who hired third party to kill her abusive husband was not entitled to self-defense instruction because she had not demonstrated that she was in imminent danger at the time of the killing
• holding that court did not err in concluding that woman who hired third party to kill her abusive husband was not entitled to self-defense instruction because she had not demonstrated that she was in imminent danger at the time of the killing
• holding the lower court was correct in failing to provide a self-defense instruction because the wife was not in imminent danger at the time her husband was killed by two men who she hired
• holding the lower court was correct in failing to provide a self-defense instruction because the wife was not in imminent danger at the time her husband was killed by two men who she hired
• holding “[a]lthough it is well-settled that an accused is entitled to an affirmative instruction on every issue fairly raised by the evidence, there is no requirement that the court charge on matters not raised by the proof”
• holding “[a]lthough it is well-settled that an accused is entitled to an affirmative instruction on every issue fairly raised by the evidence, there is no requirement that the court charge on matters not raised by the proof”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).