State v. Hicks

Summary

The court held that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, was sufficient to support instructing the jury on the aggressor doctrine even though the defendant relied on self-defense and defense of habitation. In particular, the jury could infer from conflicting accounts, the victim’s wounds, the physical evidence, and other circumstances that the defendant initiated or continued the confrontation and shot the victim as he was leaving. The court therefore reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision ordering a new trial.