Case BriefCrim Law, homicide, voluntary manslaughterHughes, 2/14/15Identity of CaseCommonwealth v. Carr, 580 A.2d 1362 (Pa. 1990)Page 363 of the casebookSummary of Facts/Procedural HistoryDefendant Carr was camping when he came across a pair of lovemaking lesbians, also camping, and opened fire. Attempted to raise a defense of provocation. TC held that the sight of lesbian lovemakers was not a legally adequate provocation and did not allow the question of provocation to go to jury. He was charged with life imprisonment, appeals on the basis that he should have got the voluntary manslaughter instruction and that the judge erred in not letting him enter evidence of his history of rejection by women, etc. Statement of the IssueShould the question of voluntary manslaughter have gone to the jury? HoldingIt is a question of law first whether there is a legally sufficient provoking event, and then it can go to the jury to figure out whether this fits with the reasonable man standard for the crime. It was not wrong for the judge to deny the instruction, as a matter of law. ReasoningThe provocation must come only from the victims, and must be one such that a reasonable person would be provoked. A reasonable person would’ve walked away or popped the popcorn and enjoyed…jk.His history wasn’t relevant because the law does not allow one to be provoked to kill by the sight of lovemaking strangers.
View Full Document