Maine Jury Instruction Manual
CHAPTER 6 REPRESENTATIVE CRIMINAL INSTRUCTIONS
§ 6-61 Self-Defense: Deadly Force: Imperfect Self-Defense—Lesser Included Offense. Instruction.
If you determine, in accordance with the previous instructions, that the elements of murder have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, you must next consider the issue of self-defense.
In certain circumstances, acts that otherwise might be criminal, including, in a few instances, use of deadly force, may be justified where reasonably necessary to protect an individual.
Deadly force is physical force that a person uses with the intent of causing, or which he knows creates a substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury.
A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when:
1. he reasonably believes that the other person is about to use unlawful, deadly force against him; and
2. he reasonably believes that his use of deadly force is necessary to defend himself.
A person is never justified in using deadly force if he provokes the encounter leading to use of deadly force or if he knows that he can retreat from the encounter with complete safety.
Because the evidence generates an issue of whether the defendant acted in self-defense, to support a murder conviction, the State must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that:
A. With a purpose to cause physical harm to another person, the defendant provoked the encounter; or
B. The defendant knew he could retreat from the encounter with the deceased in complete safety; or
C. The defendant knew that the deceased was not about to use deadly force against him; or
D. The defendant knew that his use of deadly force was not necessary to defend himself.
If you find that although the issue of self-defense is presented, the State has proven any one or more of the above facts A, B, C or D beyond a reasonable doubt, then the State has met its burden of proving absence of self-defense and you should find the defendant guilty of murder.
If you find that the State has not proven any of the facts A, B, C or D beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should next consider whether the defendant acted so as to raise an issue of the lesser included offense of manslaughter.
If you find that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the defendant was reckless in his belief that the deceased was about to use deadly force against him or (2) that the defendant was reckless in his belief that use of deadly force was necessary to defend himself, then you should find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of manslaughter.
A belief may be reckless when, viewed in light of the nature and purpose of the person’s conduct and the circumstances known to the defendant, the defendant’s actual beliefs were not reasonable, considering what a reasonable and prudent person would believe in the same situation.
If you find that the State has not proven any of the four facts A, B, C and D to support a murder conviction or the two facts (1) and (2) to support a manslaughter conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, then the State has not met its burden of proving the absence of self-defense and you must find the defendant not guilty.
[230624]