Charles E. Haynes (Defendant-Appellant) entered a conditional plea of guilty in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, to assault. Haynes appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Facts

Nelson Flores-Pedroso was playing dominoes after lunch in the cafeteria of the federal prison in Oxford, Wisconsin, when Charles Haynes emerged from the kitchen and poured scalding oil on his head. Severely burned over 18 percent of his body, Flores-Pedroso is disfigured for life. Haynes pleaded guilty to assault, and was sentenced to 33 months’ imprisonment (consecutive to the ten-year term he was serving for a drug offense). The guilty plea reserved the right to argue on appeal that the district judge erred in foreclosing Haynes from arguing to the jury that the attack was justified as a measure of self-defense.........

1. List the facts and circumstances relevant to deciding whether Charles Haynes was entitled to the defense of self-defense.

2. State the court’s definition of “imminent” danger.

3. Summarize the court’s arguments for ruling against imminent danger.