From our private database of 30,900+ case briefs...
Commonwealth v. Shaffer
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
326 N.E.2d 880 (1975)
Facts
Roberta Shaffer (defendant) resided with her two children in a ranch house owned by the victim, to whom Shaffer was engaged. Shaffer and the victim had a tumultuous relationship. Shaffer had received several severe beatings at the hands of the victim, and on at least one occasion the victim had threatened to kill her and the children. On the morning of the homicide, an argument ensued between Shaffer and the victim, and Shaffer retreated downstairs to the basement, where the children were eating breakfast and watching television. From the top of the basement stairs, the victim threatened to kill Shaffer and the kids. Shaffer started to telephone the police but stopped when the victim said he would leave the house. Instead, the victim returned to the top of the basement stairs, at which time Shaffer grabbed a .22-caliber rifle from the rack on the wall and loaded it. Shaffer again started to telephone the police but fired one fatal shot after the victim started down the stairs. More than five minutes elapsed between the time Shaffer went to the basement and the shooting. Shaffer was convicted of manslaughter and appealed, arguing the trial judge erred by including in his self-defense instruction that Shaffer had a duty to retreat from her home.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tauro, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 551,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 30,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
