The right of self-defense is unavailable to an aggressor, and the "no retreat in the home rule" is also unavailable to one who caused the conflict.
Defendant shot and killed a man whom he accosted removing parts from defendant's junked car. An altercation ensued and defendant went into his home and returned with a loaded gun. The victim advanced with a lug wrench when he was shot. Defendant contended he was not required to retreat because he was within the curtilage of his dwelling. The trial court convicted him of manslaughter. The affirmed the conviction.
Was defendant justified in the amount of force he used against the victim?
The court held the right of self-defense was unavailable to an aggressor, and the no-retreat rule if attacked at home was available only to those who were without fault in causing the conflict.