Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Hughes v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
719 S.W.2d 560 (1986)


Facts

John Hughes (defendant) and Rodney Johnson had a problematic past. On the day of the events in question, Mary Hodge was driving Joan Goodwin and Hughes to Mary’s house. Rodney passed by in his truck and turned around to follow Mary’s car. Mary pulled over, and Joan and Hughes exited the car to talk to Rodney. Rodney cursed at Hughes. Joan testified that Rodney grabbed her and threatened her with a gun. At that moment, Hughes shot Rodney, killing him. Hughes was indicted for murder. According to Texas Penal Code (the Code) § 9.32, a defendant is justified in using deadly force if a reasonable person in the situation would not have retreated and the defendant reasonably believed that the deadly force was immediately necessary for self-defense. Section 9.33 of the Code addresses the defense of a third person, stating that such action is justified if the defendant would be justified under § 9.32 of the Code and reasonably believes that intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person. The trial court instructed the jury that a defendant is justified in using deadly force when the defendant believes such force is necessary to protect a third person and a reasonable person in the situation would not have retreated. The jury convicted Hughes of voluntary manslaughter. The court of appeals reversed, holding that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that Hughes was only entitled to use force in Joan’s defense if a reasonable person in Hughes’s situation would not have retreated. The state petitioned for discretionary review.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Clinton, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Teague, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Miller, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.