State v. Abbott

State v. Abbott, 36 N.J. 63, 174 A.2d 881 (1961),[1] is a landmark case in the American legal doctrine of retreat. In it, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously adopted a duty to retreat—a legal requirement that a threatened person cannot stand one's ground and apply lethal force in self-defense, but must instead retreat to a place of safety.[2] This retreat rule is an exception to the right of self-defense.

The duty to retreat, as endorsed in Abbott, is in direct opposition to the “true man” doctrine articulated in Erwin v. State, 29 Ohio St. 186 (1876). This common law view holds the law “will not permit the taking of [human life] to repel mere trespass, . . . but a true man who is without fault is not obliged to fly from an assailant.”[3]

Most states at the time of Abbott followed the no-retreat “true man” approach; since Abbott, it has been in major flux.[4]

State v. Abbott
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court
Full case name State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Frank Abbott, Defendant-Appellant
ArguedSeptember 13, 1961
DecidedNovember 6, 1961
Citations36 N.J. 63; 174 A.2d 881
Case history
Prior actionsState v. Abbott, 64 N.J. Super. 191, 165 A.2d 537 (Super. Ct. App. Div. 1960); 34 N.J. 176, 167 A.2d 676 (1961)
Court membership
Chief judgeJoseph Weintraub
Associate judgesNathan L. Jacobs, John J. Francis, Haydn Proctor, Frederick Wilson Hall, C. Thomas Schettino, Vincent S. Haneman
Case opinions
Decision byWeintraub
Keywords
  1. ^ State v. Abbott, 36 N.J. 63, 174 A.2d 881 (1961).
  2. ^ "Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, 7th edition". Stanford Law School. Retrieved 2018-05-29.
  3. ^ Erwin v. State, 29 Ohio St. 186, 199 (1876).
  4. ^ Criminal law and its processes : cases and materials. Kadish, Sanford H., Kadish, Sanford H. (9th ed.). New York: Wolters Kluwer Law and Business/Aspen Publishers. 2012. ISBN 9781454817550. OCLC 793099513.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)