17. Justification: Self-Defense

Question 1

To use physical force at all (not necessarily deadly force) have to prove:

Answer 1

• Reasonably believe person is going to imminently harm you using unlawful physical force (policeman’s force is not unlawful)
• Proportionality rule –only use whatever force is necessary to protect self & stop the crime

Question 2

To use deadly force:

Answer 2

• Can only use deadly force if you reasonably believe another person is using or about to use deadly physical force OR if you reasonably believe a person is committing or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible sodomy or robbery

Question 3

POV in self-defense

Answer 3

(“reasonably believe”)
- 1. Reasonable prudent person (very objective and detached)
o Most jurisdictions don’t endorse this
- 2. Reasonable person in the actor’s situation under the same or similar circumstances
o Goetz court endorses this
- 3. Reasonable to a person whose mental and physical characteristics are like the accused’s and who sees/knows what the accused sees/knows
o Leidholm court
- *Normally honest and reasonable beliefs are exculpatory even if incorrect, unreasonable mistakes are not exculpatory if also wrong
- MPC uses subjective test – “he believed the use of deadly force was necessary to protect himself” (“Imperfect justification” – unreasonable mistake is mitigation rather than complete defense – negates mens rea in murder cases - if belief is negligently/recklessly formed then can convict of lower homicide crime)

Question 4

State v. Goetz

Answer 4

• 4 young black men on subway with Goetz, 2 approach him and demand $5, he shoots them all in succession, said he was afraid they were going to rob him based on prior experiences being maimed, said his intention was to hurt them and would’ve shot more
• Reasonably prudent person in D’s situation under the same or similar circumstances (objective with subjective element) - “bizarre and abberational” thought patterns are not included – don’t want people to set own standards for permissible use of force
• Belief doesn’t have to be correct, just reasonable

Question 5

Leidholm

Answer 5

• Reasonable to a person whose mental and physical characteristics are like the accused’s (almost entirely subjective)

Question 6

Defense of habitation (Castle Doctrine)

Answer 6

some states (and common law) allow person to use deadly force to prevent entry into his home based on reasonable belief that force necessary to prevent robbery, burglary, arson, or felonious assault

Question 7

Retreat rule

Answer 7

is deadly use of force justified if it could’ve been avoided by retreat?

• MPC embraces rule, defeats right of self-defense if can avoid necessity by retreating
• Most states reject the retreat rule, but also reject right to stand one’s ground rule (consider it along with all other circumstances to see if defendant was justified in actions)
• Castle exception – don’t have to retreat if attacked in own home

Question 8

Excessive use of defensive force

Answer 8

assault, if results in death then manslaughter