The accused was charged with robbery after stealing a vehicle at gunpoint from an innocent family in a mall parking lot.
The accused claimed he acted in self-defence, arguing he stole the vehicle to escape after being attacked during a drug deal and firing his own handgun.
The court found that while the accused reasonably believed a threat of force was being used against him and acted for a defensive purpose, his response of robbing innocent bystanders at gunpoint was not reasonable in the circumstances.
The accused's reckless role in creating the dangerous situation by bringing a loaded handgun to a drug deal weighed heavily against the reasonableness of his actions.
The accused was found guilty of robbery.
