Page 1 of 2

Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:39 pm
by kbarrick
An interesting item from Florida:
(From World News Daily)


Fla. court OKs force against retreating attackers
By BILL KACZOR
Associated Press Writer
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Florida's "stand-your-ground" law allows the use of deadly force for self-protection even if an attacker or intruder is in retreat, an appellate court said Wednesday.

A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal issued that explanation for last month releasing Jimmy Hair from jail, where he had spent two years awaiting trial on a first-degree murder charge.

Hair, 28, was charged with fatally shooting Charles Harper, 26. Harper had forced his way into a car in which Hair was a passenger and then tussled with him. The car was parked outside a Tallahassee nightclub where Harper earlier had argued with the driver.

Sandi Copes, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Bill McCollum, said no decision had yet been made on whether to ask for a rehearing or possibly appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. She declined further comment.

A trial judge had refused to grant Hair "stand-your-ground" immunity due to conflicting testimony on whether Harper was being pulled out of the car by a friend when he was shot, but the appellate court said that didn't matter.

"The statute makes no exception from immunity when the victim is in retreat," the panel wrote in an unsigned, unanimous opinion.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:02 pm
by surprise_i'm_armed
Does anyone know where Texas law is on this kind of situation?

We are allowed to pursue and shoot at people who have committed a felony in the night.

Are Texas CHL's able to shoot someone who has assaulted them in order to effect the capture
of the bad guy? Even if he has none of our property in his possession?

SIA

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 7:54 pm
by boomerang
surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Does anyone know where Texas law is on this kind of situation?
Are they still a threat?
surprise_i'm_armed wrote:We are allowed to pursue and shoot at people who have committed a felony in the night.
Maybe. Maybe not. It depends on the felony.

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/do ... 009.00.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:21 pm
by TheArmedFarmer
he had spent two years awaiting trial on a first-degree murder charge.
Maybe there's a detail I'm missing here, but I wonder what happened to this man's right to a "speedy" trial?

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:43 pm
by psehorne
surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Does anyone know where Texas law is on this kind of situation?
...
Are Texas CHL's able to shoot someone who has assaulted them in order to effect the capture
of the bad guy? Even if he has none of our property in his possession?
SIA
It appears that use of deadly force is only allowed if the perp is fleeing with your property in his possession during nighttime. This is covered by P.C. 9.42
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the otheh imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal
mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing
burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime
from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by
any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover
the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial
risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Paul

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:54 pm
by ELB
TheArmedFarmer wrote:
he had spent two years awaiting trial on a first-degree murder charge.
Maybe there's a detail I'm missing here, but I wonder what happened to this man's right to a "speedy" trial?
I don't know anything about this case, but it seems that many delays are induced from the defense side, for various reasons legal and tactical. When you are charged, it should mean that the DA thinks he has enough evidence to convict you. Do you have enough evidence to counter that? May need a delay while you scrape up some. After you find a lawyer, and he has time to study the case, etc etc. Going straight to trial may not be in your best interests... And maybe the DA's witnesses will wander off, evidence get lost, the state criminal lab gets investigated...

I would also suppose that once you ask for a delay (ergo forfeiting your right to a speedy trial) you are at the mercy of everyone else's calendar; the judge, the DA, your own lawyer.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:54 am
by TheArmedFarmer
ELB, that's a good answer. I received a PM giving a similar answer, and it makes good sense. My question is answered and I'm satisfied.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:00 am
by Keith B
TheArmedFarmer wrote:
he had spent two years awaiting trial on a first-degree murder charge.
Maybe there's a detail I'm missing here, but I wonder what happened to this man's right to a "speedy" trial?
It is very common for one or the other side to ask for a postponement in the trial. I have some friends who have been waiting over a year now a case of 5 counts of negligent vehicular homicide and the trial has been rescheduled 5 times at the request of the defense attorney. Needless to say this has been very hard on the family to have it drug out so long. They just want to get through this so they can get some closure on the tragedy. :banghead:

To keep this on topic, some states have a law that allows a non-LEO to shoot a fleeing felon (i.e. one that has just committed a felony act, not a convicted felon. Although that might be a good law in some instances. :evil2: )

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:39 am
by psehorne
psehorne wrote:
It appears that use of deadly force is only allowed if the perp is fleeing with your property in his possession during nighttime. This is covered by P.C. 9.42

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly
force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the otheh imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal
mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing
burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime
from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by
any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover
the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial
risk of death or serious bodily injury.
After re-reading 9.42, I'm thinking that the phrase "during the nighttime" only applies to theft (the word immediately preceding the phrase), and that nighttime is not required for the more serious burglary, robbery, and aggravated robbery.

I'm interested in hearing others' thoughts on this.

Paul

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:53 pm
by C-dub
I think you're right. Theft or criminal mischief in the nightime. However, it seems like A and B are somewhat contradictory in that A does not say anything about escaping with the property like B does.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:55 pm
by C-dub
Oh, wait. A is to prevent the original crime and B is after the fact to prevent the criminal from fleeing.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:17 am
by jsimmons
I believe you can also use deadly force to "prevent escape". I seem to remember being told that in my CHL class last weekend.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:36 pm
by boomerang
Get a refund.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:39 pm
by C-dub
boomerang wrote:Get a refund.
But, why? That's the part "B" referred to above.

It may not be the best idea, but legal.

Re: Deadly Force even if Attacker is in Retreat

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:44 pm
by boomerang
I knew someone would say that. Fine. Get a partial refund. "rlol"

Chapter 9 allows for deadly force to "protect or recover" the property, not to stop the criminal from escaping. You can see it doesn't allow deadly force to stop a fleeing murderer or rapist.