State v. Reginald Isom

Syllabus

The defendant, Reginald Isom, argued two issues on appeal from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial related to the robbery of a pawnshop. The defendant argued that the trial justice erred in refusing to include the withdrawal exception to the initial aggressor rule in his jury instructions on self-defense. The defendant also appealed the denial of his motion for a bill of particulars and motion to compel such. The Supreme Court held that, even if it were to adopt the withdrawal exception to the initial aggressor rule, the withdrawal exception was not applicable here. The Supreme Court determined that the defendant did not present evidence that the danger he created as the initial aggressor had dissipated. Thus, the Supreme Court did not adopt the withdrawal exception within the context of this case. The Supreme Court also held that the trial justice correctly found that the specific allegations in the indictment and the discovery provided by the state—including the video of the entire encounter that formed the basis for the charges for which the defendant was convicted—were sufficient to supply the defendant with such particulars as to avoid surprise at trial. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court.