This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-09-30 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| Granting arguendo that there was unlawful aggression, we find that petitioner's contention that he employed reasonable means to repel the aggression must fail. It is settled that reasonable necessity of the means employed does not imply material commensurability between the means of attack and defense. What the law requires is rational equivalence.[66] | |||||