Are You Going to Jail? (The next installment)

[ColdSteel223]

Good Shoot. Wounded guy gets charged with murder and billed for the ammo that you used and the repair of your generator.

1. You really shouldn't steal.
2. Don't advance on a man with a gun (while you violate #1).
3. Two on one.

 

[BDBHoover]

It's a perimeter fence only, 6' privacy.

YOU DIDN"T ANSWER THE REST OF MY QUESTIONS!!! laaaaame

 

[88GT]

I agree. Probably going to jail. Also, life was not in danger. Reasonable force would be justified in this situation though.

Facts not in evidence. Empty-handed does not mean unarmed. And I'm not in the habit of assuming that trespassing thieves are looking out for my best interest. I always assume unwanted personnel inside the perimeter are dangerous.

I have never really understood the "holding people at gunpoint" scenario, unless you are an LEO of some sort. Basically, I have always been taught never to point my weapon at anyone unless I was ready to pull the trigger and end the threat.

So you can think of zero circumstances where a firearm could be employed without discharging it?

[/QUOTE]

True, but I don't think it's reasonable to assume that they are going to harm you and that you should start shooting. At least thats how I think the judge is going to look at it. If it's on your porch, thats different.

Would it change if the homeowner in the scenario were female?

Yes, he does.

Well there's the problem right there.


Edit: This is a good example of how a dog can be an important home protection tool. Unleash the hound as you exit the main residence and let him flush them from their hiding places. Any violence visited on the dog is justification for reasonable assumption that they would be violent with the homeowner. But at the very least, you wouldn't be surprised by them running out of the shed, and at least one wouldn't make it out of the yard in one piece.

 

[Exodus]

So let me get this straight, you can't defend your own property unless you use it regularly?

Privacy fence or perimiter fence, whats the differnce if you mow the whole interior?

So when the guy that lives in an RV on my "country" property (to watch over the land) shoots a BG that is running out of my cabin with my property he is going to jail?

What is the purpose of being to carry a handgun on ALL of your own property (without a LTCH) if you can't use it to defend you and yours?

 

[Kutnupe14]

That only works in Carmel against dogs.

To stay on topic....
I think this is beatable, you might spend the night in the hooskow, but I think you'll be ok. This, of course, is if you follow the #1 rule, which is to shut your pie hole until you've talked to a lawyer.

Facts:
1. 20' distance and closing
2. it's dark out, and the BGs are backlit from the shed
3. 2 BG vs. 1 GG (in my underwear)

"Officer, these 2 guys come bustin' outta my shed right for me, but I'd like to consult my attorney before saying anything else."

It's your (fenced off) property, your position as well as the BGs can be ascertained, and the live BG may or may not make it to refute any claim you make.

To TFT:
Does the BG survive until the po-po can question him?

This....

It all depends on articulation. If you flat out say, "I shot them because they were stealing from me," enjoy tossing Tater and Tyrone's salad. If you can articulate a legitimate fear and danger posed to you and your family, you'll be good to go. The defense of property should be the last thing that you consider when stating your case. In the first instance, I'm arresting you period. In the second, I take very thorough notes, and forward it on.

 

[jeremy]

This....

It all depends on articulation. If you flat out say, "I shot them because they were stealing from me," enjoy tossing Tater and Tyrone's salad. If you can articulate a legitimate fear and danger posed to you and your family, you'll be good to go. The defense of property should be the last thing that you consider when stating your case. In the first instance, I'm arresting you period. In the second, I take very thorough notes, and forward it on.

You mean something like...

Officer I was heading out to my Garage to shut the light off when I was almost there the Garage door opened up and I had 2 Persons come out straight at me. Scared the Bejesus out of me....

How is that for starters...

 

[the1kidd03]

They may have been fleeing...but it was towards you....and in the dark your defensive practice will rely on whether or not you were able to see a "weapon" in their hands in the dark thus presenting a threat to your life if they did not stop their advancement and justifying use of deadly force...............................lol, personally if cops didn't arrive from a concerned neighbors phone call then..."What gun shots? I don't know what you're talking about. I was in asleep"

 

[Kutnupe14]

You mean something like...

Officer I was heading out to my Garage to shut the light off when I was almost there the Garage door opened up and I had 2 Persons come out straight at me. Scared the Bejesus out of me....

How is that for starters...

....looking like drug crazed banshees.... ***bang, bang***
I did what I needed to do to protect myself and my family. I'm their only protection. After immediately calling the police, I afterwards noticed that the two men had some of my property in their possession.

Officer (if it's me): Can I move across the street from you?

 

[Bill B]

It's a perimeter fence only, 6' privacy.

A privacy fence indicates an expectation of privacy, further increasing the chances that the court will consider it curtilage

I suspect that because the fence is a perimeter fence, it doesn't qualify as curtilage.

Now if the fence was connected to the house and enclosed a smaller space, such as around a deck, (think of the fenced in deck as just another room of your house), then that would definitely be considered curtilage.

You keep saying that, but haven't given any reason why, or shown how it is relevant to a curtilage.
This entire case depends on whether or not it occured in the curtilage of the home. If so, then the castle doctrine applies and the homeowner is in the right. If not, then normal self-defense applies and the homeowner is on thinner ice.
Either way, you're going to have to post bail and see the judge.

 

[jeremy]

....looking like drug crazed banshees.... ***bang, bang***
I did what I needed to do to protect myself and my family. I'm their only protection. After immediately calling the police, I afterwards noticed that the two men had some of my property in their possession.

Not that hard was it...

Officer (if it's me): Can I move across the street from you?

Well, if you were the Officer out here. The Coroner would have probably beat you out to my place. Talk about response times...
Sigh...

Across the street is a Corn Field?!
Now down the Road, about a mile is a nice little place...

 

[moischmoe]

What is the purpose of being to carry a handgun on ALL of your own property (without a LTCH) if you can't use it to defend you and yours?

You CAN use it to defend yourself, to defend your life, anywhere on your property.

You CAN use it "to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle."

You can NOT shoot someone for merely trespassing:
"With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect."

 

[jbombelli]

I don't know that I would shoot someone over my new generator. Besides, if that one guy is running carrying my new Honda EB11000, my shotgun isn't going to stop him.

Besides, you can bet it would be insured against theft.



But I certainly wouldn't convict someone that DID.

 

[moischmoe]

You keep saying that, but haven't given any reason why, or shown how it is relevant to a curtilage.
This entire case depends on whether or not it occured in the curtilage of the home. If so, then the castle doctrine applies and the homeowner is in the right. If not, then normal self-defense applies and the homeowner is on thinner ice.
Either way, you're going to have to post bail and see the judge.

I just don't think you can put a privacy fence around your entire property and have the entire area be considered curtilage.

Curtilage is the immediate, enclosed area surrounding a house or dwelling. The U.S. Supreme Court noted in United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294 (1987), that curtilage is the area immediately surrounding a residence that "harbors the `intimate activity associated with the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life.'' Curtilage, like a house, is protected under the fourth amendment from "unreasonable searches and seizures.''
Determining the boundaries of curtilage is imprecise and subject to controversy. Four of the factors used to dtermine whether to classify the area as curtilage include:



1) The distance from the home to the place claimed to be curtilage (the closer the home is, the more likely to be curtilage);


2) Whether the area claimed to be curtilage is included within an enclosure surrounding the home;


3) The nature of use to which the area is put (if it is the site of domestic activities, it is more likely to be a part of the curtilage); and


4) The steps taken by the resident to protect the area from observation by people passing by (shielding from public view will favor finding the portion is curtilage).

 

[lovemachine]

You can see that one man is carrying your new Honda generator

Here's a new approach.

Was the generator hooked up?

I would think if it was hooked up to your house, FROM the shed, then the shed would become a part of the curtilage.

Or do I have that completely wrong?

 

[jsharmon7]

Okay, I only read the OP so I wouldn't be biased. I would say you're likely going to jail in this scenario. The key phrase in the statute is "reasonable force." Someone stealing your property and not directly threatening you does not justify deadly force in my opinion. Option B: call the on-call prosecutor for guidance.

 

[iChokePeople]

Curtilage, schmurtilage. "I was in fear for my life. I heard noises outside and went out to see what it was. I saw two men running toward me, I feared for my life and my family, and I defended myself. For anything more than that, I'd like to wait until my attorney arrives."

As I understand it, defending yourself knows nothing about the complexities of curtilage... Right? I'll be doing everything I can to keep this issue focused on "I was in fear for my life and the safety of my family", nothing more than that. And if I'm convincing, I don't think I'll be in jail very long, if at all.

And, to be clear, I'd only shoot if that was true. I would not shoot to protect my generator.

 

[Rookie]

Option B: call the on-call prosecutor for guidance.

Before or after you shoot them?

 

[jsharmon7]

Before or after you shoot them?

I wouldn't shoot in that situation, so that part is irrelevant for me. I'm looking at this from a legal standpoint as far as how to handle the call. My opinion is that the person in this situation is in the wrong, but before I arrest anybody for shooting someone I'm going to make a phone call.

Again, I wouldn't shoot in that situation.

 

[jedi]

Would it change if the homeowner in the scenario were female?

:offtopic:
Yes it would have changed the verdict in the court trial. I can't recall if it was in the Ayoob Files or which issue of the digital guns & ammo magazine that I get in my inbox each month. There was an article in which a study was done on home defense shootings vs shooter sex and weapon type.

The study found the following:

Higher probablity of home self-defense not working
Male using a shotgun
Male using a semi-auto
Male using a revolver
Female using a semi-auto
Female using a shotgun
Female using a revolver
Lower probablity of home self-defense not working

Basically if you are a guy or girl it is best to use a revolver for home defense from a legal point of view in terms of how other court cases around the nation have gone. Statstically speaking.

It was an interesting article and I will have to dig it up again. In the article they find out that juries will side witha female victim more than with a male. Juries tend to think that a female is not capable of using a firearm for home defense.

 

[T.Lex]

Actually, I would put a slightly different perspective on that. I think juries are more likely to believe that a woman was "reasonably" in fear of her life or serious injury than a man. It is less about capability of using a firearm, and more about the reasonableness of the fear IMHO.