Mr. Corliss Case

To defend Mr. Corliss against his murder charge by using Illinois’ self-defense stature, we must prove that Mr. Corliss “reasonably believe[d] that deadly force was necessary to prevent great bodily harm to himself.” There is no real dispute that Mr. Corliss believed force was necessary because he was scared enough to have brought a gun to the party in the first place. This memorandum will discuss only the issue of showing that this belief was reasonable.
As referenced In re S.M., Illinois courts consider two factors to conclude the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief that deadly force is necessary to avoid great bodily harm. These factors are defendant’s attempts to avoid confrontation and the severity of the threat. The harder the

Corliss faced was severe. In re S.M., there were four aggressors while in Mr. Corliss' case there were two aggressors. This fact is not as important though when we look at the size difference between Mr. Corliss and the two Quill brothers. Barney Quill was three inches taller and weighed thirty-five pounds more than Mr. Corliss, while Parnell Quill was 5 inches taller and weighed sixty pounds more than Mr. Corliss. The size difference In re S.M. was considerable as well because the assailants were older than S.M. and three of the assailants were on the football team while one was on the wresting team. In both cases, the assailants were more and more aggressively chasing the defendants and refused to stop after receiving verbal and physical warnings to stop. Prosecution may assert that because neither Barney Quill nor Parnell Quill were witnessed to be in possession of a gun during the incident that the shooting of Barney Quill occurred, Mr. Corliss was not facing a severe enough threat to warrant his shooting of Barney. However, it can be argued that since the Quill brothers had a history of carrying and firing guns at people, including at Mr. Corliss, and that prior to Mr. Corliss shooting Barney, Barney had his hand in his pocket as if he had a gun which he didn't remove after being warned by Mr. Corliss that he would shoot if he didn’t essentially remove said hand, Mr. Corliss had no reason to believe that Barney didn't have a gun or that Barney did no plan to inflict great bodily harm upon him. Taking all of these facts into consideration, it is likely the court will find that the threat that Mr. Corliss faced was severe