State of Arizona v. Jordan Christopher Ewer, 523 P.3d 393

In July 2017 Jordan Ewer and others confronted Gilbert and Emily over a disputed heroin purchase and a Bluetooth speaker taken as collateral; an initial confrontation included Ewer brandishing a gun.
Later that night Ewer returned, rocks were thrown, Ewer fired multiple times, and Gilbert was killed; Ewer was charged with second-degree murder and related firearm offenses.
At trial Ewer requested standard RAJI self-defense and related instructions using the word “defendant.” The State successfully moved to replace “defendant” with “person,” arguing the jury could consider the victim’s use of force as potentially justified.
The trial court gave the modified instructions; the State argued the victim’s lawful conduct could negate Ewer’s justification; the jury convicted Ewer on all counts.
The court of appeals vacated the convictions and ordered a new trial, concluding the justification instructions should not apply to the victim. The Arizona Supreme Court granted review to decide whether §13-404(A)’s use of “person” extends to victims or only to defendants.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the word “person” in A.R.S. §13-404(A) and related RAJI instructions may be read to allow the jury to apply the justification defense to a victim as well as the defendant	The State: “person” is broad and may include the victim; RAJI should be modified so the jury can find the victim’s conduct justified, which would defeat the defendant’s claim	Ewer: “person” in the justification statutes and RAJI refers to a criminal defendant; the victim’s legal status is immaterial to the defendant’s justification claim	The Court: “person” in §13-404(A) refers to a defendant in a criminal prosecution; modifying RAJI to apply justification to the victim was legally incorrect and the trial court erred

State v. King, 225 Ariz. 87 (Ariz. 2010) (self-defense inquiry asks whether a reasonable person in the defendant’s circumstances would have believed force was immediately necessary)
State v. Carson, 243 Ariz. 463 (Ariz. 2018) (a reasonable but mistaken belief about a threat can support a justification defense)
State v. Abdi, 226 Ariz. 361 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011) (court of appeals previously held RAJI should not be modified to include victim’s justification; Supreme Court disagreed with reliance on legislative history)
Molera v. Hobbs, 250 Ariz. 13 (Ariz. 2020) (statutory language must be read in context with related statutes)
SolarCity Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Revenue, 243 Ariz. 477 (Ariz. 2018) (plain statutory text and context are the best indicators of legislative intent)
State v. Lujan, 136 Ariz. 102 (Ariz. 1983) (provocation can negate a self-defense instruction)
State v. Buggs, 167 Ariz. 333 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990) (justification fails if force was not immediately necessary)