This could possibly be where the “stand your ground” law could come in play, which exempts Zimmerman if deemed applicable?
The part of the so-called stand-your-ground law that allows a person to use deadly force in certain circumstances will come into play in the criminal trial. Zimmerman is claiming his use of deadly force was justified.
A formal legal finding of immunity (from trial) involves a higher standard of proof that the use of deadly force was justified than is applied by a jury in an acquittal in a criminal case.
The part of the so-called stand-you-ground law that literally involves a right to stand your ground (no duty to retreat) is completely irrelevant in this case.