TX: Houston Homeowner shoots robber, was it justified?

[philip964]

http://www.click2houston.com/news/homeo ... ris-county

Good ole boy in overalls was interviewed at length on local TV news after shooting a suspected robber. He said his breakfast was stopped by the sound of his chained gated opening. A man was attempting to steal his trailer and 4 wheeler on it. The robber had used bolt cutters to open the gate.

The homeowner got his gun, but it sounded like the robber was running or driving away when he was shot. It also did not seem that he was on his property when he was shot. He also did not leave with any stolen property and it was the day time.

The homeowner was not arrested. He was asked if the robber said anything to him, the homeowner responded "stop shooting". There was also no mention of the robber having a gun or any weapon.

So this is being presented to a grand jury. Was it a justified shooting?

[cirus]

To the grand jury probably not. I personally wouldn't shoot someone over property unless they are in my home and then its game on. If outside he would have to threaten me with violence.

[hovercat]

Not enough particulars to judge.
Theft is slavery. Someone is taking the fruit of your time and labor without your consent or any compensation. We fought a war over that in 1776.

[Excaliber]

Leaving aside the moral issues around shooting someone who is stealing property outside while unarmed, it happened in the daytime.

Based on the facts as given, I don't find justification for shooting someone under that fact pattern in the law.

His decision to give an interview before his grand jury has even been convened also suggests that his knowledge of the legal issues may be less than thorough. That will likely come back to bite him and he's likely to lose a lot more than a 4 wheeler and trailer.

[Jago668]

Eh, probably not legally. However I really don't have a problem with thieves getting shot. I imagine this will go to trial, and then it depends on the jury he gets.

[goose]

I have understood it the way Excaliber describes it. Generally speaking I did not think property theft in the daylight was a shootable offense under law. As a refresher can someone remind us, I thought that there was a different word for burglary in the daylight, vs burglary at night? I think that it is in 9.42 but I don't see any special word. I may also be remembering it wrong and there is no special word.

[WildBill]

PC §9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in
using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41;
and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other’s 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 night¬time 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

[WildBill]

He was asked if the robber said anything to him, the homeowner responded "stop shooting".

If this goes to trial, I think this may be the most important part of the evidence.

[KLB]

Whether or not you can get away with it legally, I think most of us would sleep better at night if we used a gun only in defense of self or others.

[Javier730]

I have understood it the way Excaliber describes it. Generally speaking I did not think property theft in the daylight was a shootable offense under law. As a refresher can someone remind us, I thought that there was a different word for burglary in the daylight, vs burglary at night? I think that it is in 9.42 but I don't see any special word. I may also be remembering it wrong and there is no special word.

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's 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.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

Only thing I see with nighttime is theft, criminal mischief and preventing thief from escaping with property. The thief had no property while fleeing and it was daytime. The shooter might be in some trouble.

[sugar land dave]

I hope he has a good lawyer who can sell it to the grand jury as robbery. Giving an interview would not have been my preferred post-event action.

[rotor]

All depends on who is on the grand jury. I doubt that he is a LTC holder semi-familiar with the nuances of the law. But the "don't steal from me" has a strong emotional component. I hope he gets off.

[crazy2medic]

In the daylight I probably wouldn't have shot him, but I would have given him every chance in the world to race my dogs to the property line!

[goose]

Only thing I see with nighttime is theft, criminal mischief and preventing thief from escaping with property. The thief had no property while fleeing and it was daytime. The shooter might be in some trouble.

That was how I read it as well.

The suspect definitely sounds like a real winner. My sympathy is for the homeowner but I'm not sure that I would have pulled the trigger. I suspect he may have legal bills he wasn't planning on.

[philip964]

There was a lot of sympathy for the homeowner in the way the news story was presented. He appeared to live in an area where property crime was rampant. Everyone seemed to have tall chain link fences in their front yards on the property line.

It appeared the chain link gate was also on the property line. So the BG may not have even gotten a chance to enter his property before he was discovered by the homeowner.