Runyan v. State
| Runyan v. State | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
| Full case name | Runyan v. The State. |
| Decided | May 1877 |
| Citation | 50 Ind. 80 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | James Worden, Horace P. Biddle, Samuel E. Perkins, William Niblack, George Howk |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Niblack |
| Keywords | |
Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80 (1877), was an Indiana court case that argued natural law and a distinct American Mind to reject a duty to retreat when claiming self-defense in a homicide case.[1][2]
Background
[edit]On election night for the 1876 presidential race, John Runyan was harassed for being a Democrat by Charles Presnall when they were both in New Castle, Indiana. Runyan shot and killed him with his revolver even though he could have retreated.
Decision
[edit]The court implied it was un-American,[2]: 551–2 writing of a referring to the distinct American mind,[1] "the tendency of the American mind seems to be very strongly against" a duty to retreat.[1] The court went further in saying that no statutory law could require a duty to retreat, because the right to stand one's ground is "founded on the law of nature; and is not, nor can it be, superseded by any law of society."
References
[edit]- ^ a b c No Duty to Retreat:Violence and Values in American History and Society 4030 (1991)
- ^ a b Criminal Law - Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business; John Kaplan, Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder, ISBN 978-1-4548-0698-1, [1]
 | This article relating to case law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |