Cited by

Minn. Stat. § 609.06 (2018); -86 (Minn. 1997).

“The degree of force used in self -defense must not exceed that which appears to be necessary to a reasonable person under similar circumstances.” State v. Basting

Once a defendant raises self-defense at trial, “the state has the burden of disproving one or more of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt.”

-86 (Minn. 1997); (“The state need only prove the 1 Blackwell asserted self-defense with respect to both the assault and disorderly conduct charges.

12 d 29, 35 (Minn. 2024) (alteration in original) (emphasis removed) ().

“The elements of self-defense are (1) the absence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defendant; (2) the defendant’s actual and honest belief that [they were] in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm; (3) the defendant’s belief is reasonable; and (4) the defendant does not have reasonable possibility to retreat to avoid the danger.”

(d 281, 285 (Minn. 1997)).

(noting that the state defeats a self-defense claim by disproving just one of the elements of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt).

In a case that involved a claim of self-defense to a charge of felony second-degree assault-harm with a dangerous weapon, we said that the reasonab le force authorized under section 609.06, subdivision 1(3) may be used only in “the absence of a reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.” State v. Basting , –86 (Minn. 1997).

ence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defendant,” meaning that the victim must be the initial aggressor; (2) “the defendant’s actual and honest belief that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm”; (3) “the existence of reasonable grounds for that belief”; and (4) “the absence of a reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.”

In addition to those elements, “[t]he degree of force used in self-defense must not exceed that which appears to be necessary to a reasonable person under similar circumstances.”

See Basting, (stating “as a matter of law, that the manner in which [the defendant] used his fist did not constitute the use of a dangerous weapon for purposes of an analysis under Minn. Stat. § 609.222, subd.

12 “When determining whether an object, even an inherently dangerous object, is a dangerous weapon, the court must examine not only the nature of the object itself, but also the manner in which it was used.”

Determining whether an object is a dangerous weapon depends on “the nature of the object itself” and “the manner in which it was used.”

bodily harm would result; (3) a reasonable basis existed for this belief; and (4) an absence of reasonable means to retreat or otherwise avoid the physical conflict.” () (holding that these same “principles of self-defense in homicide cases apply to assault cases as well”), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.

If a defendant asserts a self-defense defense, the defendant has the initial burden of “going forward with evidence to support a claim of self-defense.”

here are four elements to a self-defense claim: “(1) the absence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defendant; (2) the defendant’s actual and honest belief that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm; (3) the existence of reasonable grounds for that belief; and (4) the absence of a reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.” – 86 (Minn. 1997).

Whether an object was used as a dangerous weapon depends on “not only the nature of the object itself, but also the manner in which it was used.” Weyaus, d at 585 ().

self-defense elements beyond a reasonable doubt: “(1) the absence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defendant; (2) the defendant’s actual and honest belief that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm; (3) the existence of reasonable grounds for that belief; and (4) the absence of a reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.”

(victim said, “I’m 15 going to kill that [woman]”); (victim tried to punch defendant); –24 (Minn. 2006) (victim kicked and shot defendant); (victim hit defendant); (victim punched defendant); (victim kicked defendant in the head); (victim police officer pushed defendant’s friend); –36 (Minn. 1978) (victim fired shots); State

(d 281, 285-86 (Minn. 1997)).

See State v. Basting , (M inn.