Via the American Digest System~
Mixon v. State 1952
MIXON v. STATE*-*April 1, 1952.
The law is clear that one may not provoke a difficulty and having done so act under the necessity produced by the difficulty, then kill his adversary and justify the homicide under the plea of self defense. Zimmerman clearly provoked a difficulty, by forcing Martin to run, then exiting his vehicle. According to Zimmerman, Martin attempted to communicate at least twice with Zimmerman, who failed to state his intentions or identify himself both times, further provoking a difficulty.
The prosecution will make the following argument:
Zimmerman profiled Martin and followed him in his car, causing Martin to run. After clearly attempting to put some distance between himself and the stranger following him, Zimmerman exited his vehicle armed with a gun. Zimmerman assumed Martin had committed or was about to commit a crime and was intent Martin should not get away. Martin was innocent of any wrongdoing, and was just walking home from 7/11. Zimmerman was unjustified in pursuing Martin and under the circumstances his conduct was threatening. This, the prosecution will argue, was sufficient to
"initially provoke" the struggle, no matter who struck the first blow.
There is no credible evidence that Zimmerman either tried to escape from Martin or that he withdrew and clearly indicated his intent to withdraw from the altercation.
776.041 - - 2011 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate
