Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

777 N.E.2d 32

Smith v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 22, 2002

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 2002-10-22

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 2015

11 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2002-10-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

MATHIAS, Judge,

¶1concurring.

¶2I write to concur only to express my personal distaste and regret that this gruesome case must be retried because of Smith’s claim of self-defense. However, to hold otherwise would also preclude a claim of self-defense in much less reprehensible and much more common circumstances, such as a confrontation between motor vehicle operators after a collision stemming from criminal recklessness. Depriving those accused of a crime of a claim of self-defense reduces our society to an unacceptable “Wild West” mentality.

¶3For all of these reasons, I regretfully concur.

/777/ne2d/32 · .json · Public domain