Excessive force would be M shoved Z, Z drew his gun and shot M.
Z's claim all along was that he thought M was going to kill him, justifying lethal force in self-defense. The prosecution had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a reasonable person in Z's shoes would not think that M was going to kill him. Z did not have to prove squat. In most States, self-defense is an affirmative defense, and the burden is on the defendant. Not so in Florida.
So, as I have stated numerous times before: If the prosecution could not prove murder because they failed to prove it was not self-defense, then they have also failed to prove manslaughter for the same reason.
IMO, Z did (even though it was not required) prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was self-defense. I think his case was a winner even where an affirmative defense is required.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.