Defendant was not entitled to a deadly force justification instruction based on his 911 call after the assault and other out-of-court statements in which he asserted, in substance, that he had disarmed a knife-wielding attacker. In his trial testimony, defendant expressly testified that these statements, which were introduced during the People's case, were untrue, and he unequivocally testified that neither he nor the victim had a knife. We do not reject defendant's claim...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
