State v. Gonzalez, 34,708

Defendant Eugene Gonzales confronted Victim (Augustine Grano) at Victim’s home after Defendant’s adult daughter Selina, who was dating Victim, failed to return home.
Defendant, worried Selina might overdose or be harmed, armed himself with a .22 revolver and went to Victim’s residence; Victim was unarmed when he stepped toward Defendant and taunted him.
Defendant shot and killed Victim, then told his daughter and 911/first responders that he had shot the man and repeatedly confessed ("I’m guilty," "I shot the son of a bitch").
At trial, Defendant requested jury instructions on self-defense (UJI 14-5171) and defense of another (UJI 14-5172); the district court denied both instructions.
The jury convicted Defendant of voluntary manslaughter (lesser included offense of second-degree murder); Defendant appealed challenging the denial of the defense instructions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Gonzales)	Held
Whether defendant was entitled to a self-defense instruction	No — evidence did not show defendant reasonably feared immediate death/great bodily harm when he shot Victim	Yes — Victim’s violent reputation, alleged threats, and harassing conduct created a reasonable fear of imminent harm	Denied: Court held evidence did not support subjective fear or that the killing resulted from such fear; defendant also was the initial aggressor
Whether defendant was entitled to a defense-of-another instruction	No — no appearance Victim posed immediate danger to Selina or that defendant believed Selina was in imminent danger	Yes — defendant acted to protect Selina from potential overdose or harm by Victim	Denied: Court found no evidence Victim posed immediate danger to Selina or that defendant shot to prevent such harm

State v. Brown, 931 P.2d 69 (N.M. 1996) (failure to give a requested instruction supported by evidence is reversible error)
State v. Sandoval, 258 P.3d 1016 (N.M. 2011) (self-defense and defense-of-another analyzed similarly; review favors giving requested instruction)
State v. Rudolfo, 187 P.3d 170 (N.M. 2008) (distinguishes subjective fear and objective reasonableness in self-defense inquiry)
State v. Lucero, 972 P.2d 1143 (N.M. 1998) (provoking an encounter precludes self-defense claim)
State v. Gonzales, 172 P.3d 162 (N.M. 2007) (evidence must support defendant’s perception of apparent danger)
State v. Boyett, 185 P.3d 355 (N.M. 2008) (instructions reviewed in light most favorable to defendant)