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

Martin v. Ohio

United States Supreme Court
480 U.S. 228 (1987)


During an argument, the husband of Earline Martin (defendant) hit her in the head. According to Martin, she picked up her husband’s gun to get rid of it. When the husband saw something in Martin’s hand, he lunged at her. Martin lost control and fired the gun at her husband, killing him. Martin was charged with aggravated murder, which was defined under Ohio law as purposely causing another’s death with prior calculation and design. Martin pled self-defense, an affirmative defense under Ohio law, which the defendant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence. The judge rejected Martin’s contention that placing the burden on Martin to prove self-defense violated her right to due process, and the judge instructed the jury that a conviction required a finding that: (1) the state had proved each element of aggravated murder beyond a reasonable doubt, and (2) none of the self-defense evidence had raised a reasonable doubt that Martin purposely killed her husband with a prior design. The jury was also instructed that an acquittal required a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that Martin acted in self-defense and: (1) did not start the argument with her husband, (2) honestly believed that she was an imminent danger, and (3) satisfied any duty to retreat. The jury convicted Martin, and Martin appealed.

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.


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 (White, 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.

Dissent (Powell, 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 223,000 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.