With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". J., concurs. 1 . Ind.Code § 35-47-2-1, -23(c)(2)(B). 2 . Mayes also is entitled to no relief on this claim for an additional reason. The record shows Mayes fired five shots at Mary, and at least one bullet struck her in the back as Mary was either falling down or already on the ground. Firing multiple shots undercuts a claim of self-defense. Miller v. State 720 N.E.2d 696, 700 (Ind.1999) (finding sufficient evidence to disprove the defendant's self-defense claim considering the defendant's aggressive behavior and thai he fired multiple shots at the victim). See also Birdsong v. State, 685 N.E.2d 42, 46 (Ind.1997) (noting that deadly force was unreasonable because victims were shot several times after being incapacitated); Schlegel v. State, 238 Ind. 374, 150 N.E.2d 563, 567 (Ind.1958) (<HOLDING>). Thus, there was sufficient evidence before

A: holding that although the first shot might have been justified in selfdefense a second shot to the victims body cannot be so justified when danger of death or great bodily harm ceases
B: holding that illegal use of a weapon is one of the predicate offenses for manslaughter where there is no intent to cause death or great bodily harm
C: holding it error to give selfdefense instruction requiring that defendant believe his actions were necessary to avert death or great bodily harm when defendant claimed that the victims death was accidental
D: holding that the erroneous admission of a hearsay statement that identified the defendant as the shooter was harmless where the defendant never contested that he shot the gun but claimed only that he shot in selfdefense
A.