Cited by

(“Generally, a reasonableness determination is properly made by the finder of fact”).

“Generally, the law requires that a person retreat if reasonably possible before acting in self-defense.” Devens, d at 258 ().

See, d 29, 36 (Minn. 2024) (“To date,[8] we have recognized only one exception to the judicially created duty to retreat when reasonably possible before using the force authorized in section 609.06, subdivision 1(3): when a person is in their home.”); Johnson, d at 622, 629; – 02 (Minn. 2001) (stating that “[t]here is no duty to retreat from one’s own home when acting in self-defense in the home,” observing that “it is not now and never has been the law that a man assailed in his own dwelling is

d 392, 402-03 (Minn. 2001).

Reasonable Use of Force “[T]he concept of reasonableness is a critical part of self -defense.”

In self-defense situations, “even absent a duty to retreat, the key inquiry will still be into the reasonableness of the use of force and the level of force under the specific circumstances of each case.” State v. Glowacki

The state cites to a more recent supreme court opinion, State v. Rund, in 4 Hennum was abrogated in part on a

“[I]n all situations in which a party claims self - defense, even absent a duty to retreat, the key inquiry will still be into the reasonableness of the use of force and the level of force under the specific circumstances of each case.” State v. Glowacki , .

See State v. Glowacki , (holding th at “[t]here is no duty to retreat from one’s own home when acting in self-defense in the home, regardless of whether the aggressor is a co-resident”).

a person retreat if reasonably possible before acting in self-defense,” id, and usually “a reasonableness determination is properly made by the finder of fact—in this case, the jury.” d 392, 403 (Minn. 2001).

A defendant is entitled to a new trial due to an erroneous jury instruction “if it cannot be said beyond a reasonable doubt that the error had no significant impact on the verdict.” (quotation omitted).

Even assuming the other self-defense elements are met, Lampkin exited the apartment building, demonstrating he had “somewhere safer to go.”

(“To find that a defendant acted in self-defense, a jury must .

With respect to the fourth element, the law imposes a duty to retreat when retreat appears “reasonably possible.”

(holding there is no duty to retreat from one’s own home when acting in self-defense in the home, regardless of whether the aggressor is a co-resident).

“Generally, a party waives the right to appeal a jury instruction by failing to object at trial.”

(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); Stat

See, (stating that “when acting in self-defense in the home, a person should not be required to retreat from the home before using reasonable force to defend himself” (emphasis added)); (s tating that there is no duty to retreat “for people engagi

-03 (Minn. 2001) (holding that a new-trial motion preserves a jury-instruction error involving fundamental law or controlling principles).

4 “Generally, a party waives the right to appeal a jury instruction by failing to object to it at trial.”

“Generally, a reasonableness dete rmination is properly made by the finder of fact.” State v. Glowacki , (noting that a reasonableness determination is properly made by jury if evidence could allow a reasonable mind to draw an adverse inference).

(adopting rule that “[t]here is no duty to retreat from one’s own home when acting in self -defense in the home, regardless of whether the aggressor is a coresident”).

See State v. Wermerskirchen , , 240-42 (Minn. 1993) (holding that prior uncharged acts of sexual abuse are admissible as relevant to the issue of whether the charged act of sexual abuse occurred); State v. Hennum , , 798-99 (Minn. 1989) (holding that expert testimony regarding battered woman syndrome is admissible); see also State v. Glowacki , , 401 (Minn. 2001) (justifying a rule of law that a person has no duty to retreat from one's home premised in part on "the realities facing those persons

“Generally, a party waives the right to appeal a jury instruction by failing to object to it at trial.”

A motion for a ( “[D]espite a defendant’s fail ure to object to a jury instruction at trial, if the instruction contains an error of fundamental law or a controlling principle, a motion for a new trial adequately preserves the is sue for appeal.” (quotation omitted)).

However, “[t]here is no duty to retreat from one’s own home when acting in self -defense in the home, regardless 5 of whether the aggressor is a co-resident.”

In general, the law requires that a person “retreat if reasonably possible when acting in self-defense.”

at 286; (“To find that a defendant acted in self-defense, a jury must .