State v. Leidholm
| State v. Leidholm | |
|---|---|
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
| Full case name | State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Janice Leidholm, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Decided | May 12, 1983 |
| Citation(s) | 334 N.W.2d 811 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Ralph J. Erickstad, Vernon R. Pederson, William Paulson, Gerald W. VandeWalle, Paul M. Sand |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | VandeWalle |
| Concurrence | Erickstad, Pederson, Paulson, Sand |
| Keywords | |
State v. Leidholm, Supreme Court of North Dakota, 334 N.W.2d 811 (1983), is a criminal law case distinguishing the subjective and objective standard of reasonableness in a case where a battered woman used self-protection as a defense.[1][2][3][4] Janice Leidholm had killed her husband near Washburn, North Dakota and claimed self defense. The case clarifies between the defenses of justification and excuse.[1]
References[edit]
- ^ a b Criminal Law Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, John Kaplan, Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder
- ^ The Meaning of Equality for Battered Woman Who Kill Men in Self-Defense, PL Crocker - Harvard Women's LJ, 1985
- ^ A Trend Emerges: A State Survey on the Admissibility of Expert Testimony concerning the Battered Woman Syndrome, A CL Coffee - J. Fam. L., 1986
- ^ Factors predicting verdicts in cases where battered women kill their husbands, Follingstad, Diane R.; Polek, Darlene S.; Hause, Elizabeth S.; Deaton, Lenne H.; Bulger, Michael W.; Conway, Zanthia D., Law and Human Behavior, Vol 13(3), Sep 1989, 253-269
 | This article relating to case law in the United States or its constituent jurisdictions is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |