The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 26, 2012, 12:17 AM   #51
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
...Maybe I'm reading the law wrong, but isn't the basic premise still that killing another person is unlawful, and that self-defense (with or without a duty to retreat) is an exception that must be claimed ...
There is a unique wrinkle in Florida law, however.

As the laws of a number of States now do, Florida law provides for immunity from criminal prosecution and from civil suit for someone who uses force in justified self defense. See 776.032:
Quote:
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection
The difficulty is that there will always be some threshold questions to be decided before it can be determined whether or not immunity applies. Immunity only applies when the use of force meets all the legal requirements for justification.

In Florida, as provided under 776.032, that would mean that the defendant's use of force was, "...as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031..."; and each of those statutes has conditions that must be satisfied for there to be a finding of justification. If the DA agrees that someone's use of force was justified, that would resolve at least the criminal side of things.

Issues, however, arise when the DA thinks someone's use of force was not justified. If there is that fundamental disagreement, there needs to be a way to resolve it. Ordinarily, that would be done at a trial, as described above, in post 16, under "I. How Pleading Self Defense Works." Florida has established a slightly different procedure.

In Dennis v. State, 51 So.3d 456 (Fla., 2010), the Supreme Court of Florida ruled:
Quote:
We conclude that where a criminal defendant files a motion to dismiss on the basis of section 776.032, the trial court should decide the factual question of the applicability of the statutory immunity. ... and [we] approve the reasoning of Peterson on that issue.
And in Peterson v. State, 983 So.2d 27 (Fla. App., 2008), referred to by the Florida Supreme Court, the appellate court ruled:
Quote:
Petitioner seeks a writ of prohibition to review an order denying his motion to dismiss based on the statutory immunity established by section 776.032(1), Florida Statutes (2006). We deny the petition and hold that a criminal defendant claiming protection under the statute must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she is immunized from prosecution...
Based on these seminal Florida court decisions, if a defendant is charged with a crime (or, it would appear, sued) based on a use of force, and if the defendant claims justification as his defense, instead of raising self defense as an affirmative defense at trial --
  1. The defendant would raise his defense in a motion to dismiss based on the immunity provided under 776.032; and

  2. The court would hold an evidentiary hearing on the motion; and

  3. The defendant at that hearing would need to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that each element required for legal justification has been satisfied.

  4. Should the court deny the motion, it appears from certain language in Peterson that he would still be able to raise self defense as an affirmative defense at trial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottRiqui
...in Virginia. Any killing is automatically second-degree murder, and the state doesn't even have to present a case in order to get a conviction...
I think you must have misunderstood something. I'd very much like to know where your belief in that regard comes from. A citation would be welcome.

Were that the case, there would be some major problems under Due Process and it would be completely inconsistent with the Presumption of Innocence so firmly embedded in our criminal law.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 05:59 AM   #52
Carry_24/7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2011
Posts: 801
Frank; no argument about immunity for a justified self defense shooting, as it should be.

I believe the problem comes from proof your shooting is justified.

How about a police officer? Can someone ambush a cop, shoot him in the head, call 911 and state the officer threatened him unjustifiably, that he felt his life was in danger? On the scene there's no witnesses, no video, just signs of a struggle between the two.... Should the shooter be arrested and taken before a judge, or released at the scene since there's little evidence other than what's previously stated? The dead cop can't talk and the shooter claims self-defense.....

What ya think?
Carry_24/7 is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 08:37 AM   #53
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Carry, It would seem that your line of thinking hasn't come to fruition enuff to be an issue in Fla as of yet.

I just do not here about shootings that later were found to "set ups" to use SD as grounds.

Things the defendant has to articulate is what did he fear that the others in society would fear? At what point in conflict did def. determine use of force was needed and why that point in time.

If the def. acted sooner or harsher than a typical person, why? What was the "disparity of force" that made the def. feel more threatened or sooner than a "typical" person...

For instance, as a kid I was always smallest in each grade I attended. If I needed to defend myself I had to unleash a fury and immediately gain the upper hand 'cuz if this scrap went on long, the heavier taller opponent would easily gain the upper hand.

Now that I have a screwed up "strong side" left arm and numerous other "old injuries", I simply cannot physically defend myself against most any determined adult... Heck... Most of our wives could whoop me if they really wanted to...

I just ain't willing to find out how easily I break in half...

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 09:40 AM   #54
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,970
Quote:
I believe the problem comes from proof your shooting is justified.

How about a police officer?
Carry,

With respect, it always intrigues me as to why some have the idea that murdering a police officer is somehow worse then murdering anyone else.
Your stated 'police officer' scenario should be investigated, facts gathered and if need be, prosecuted the same as any other shooting.
Course, I also feel the penalty for proven murder should be extreme, no plea bargaining, no immunity and the penalty applied across the board for whomever the murderer or victim was. No exceptions. Sadly, we have people in this country sitting in prisons doing more time for traficking in marijuana then murder....that's another discussion.

IMO, what it boils down to in any SD shooting is the fact that 'the shooter has to prove he/she is justified in the shooting'. This is nothing new. Has been that way as long as I can remember and I don't know of any new laws changing that fact.
shortwave is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 10:14 AM   #55
SilentScreams
Member
 
Join Date: March 23, 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 56
Quote:
With respect, it always intrigues me as to why some have the idea that murdering a police officer is somehow worse then murdering anyone else.
Your stated 'police officer' scenario should be investigated, facts gathered and if need be, prosecuted the same as any other shooting.
Course, I also feel the penalty for proven murder should be extreme, no plea bargaining, no immunity and the penalty applied across the board for whomever the murderer or victim was. No exceptions. Sadly, we have people in this country sitting in prisons doing more time for traficking in marijuana then murder....that's another discussion.
It is generally treated as any other case and investigated as such. However, the social stigma surrounding it is a bit more intense. Kind of like a soldier, they do a job most others do not want to or can't. The media also tends to hype it up a lot. And of course, like soldiers or military, when you do something to one, you might as well have done it to all of them.
__________________
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you. - Friedrich Nietzsche
SilentScreams is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 10:19 AM   #56
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
....I believe the problem comes from proof your shooting is justified.

How about a police officer? Can someone ambush a cop, shoot him in the head, call 911 and state the officer threatened him unjustifiably, that he felt his life was in danger? On the scene there's no witnesses, no video, just signs of a struggle between the two.... Should the shooter be arrested and taken before a judge, or released at the scene since there's little evidence other than what's previously stated? The dead cop can't talk and the shooter claims self-defense....
I think this really has already been answered. As with any other claimed defensive use of force, it will be handled, investigated and managed in accordance with what the evidence seems to show as the investigation unfolds and what the local policies are.

And remember that even though the shooter's testimony is evidence, it will be considered in light of factors relating to his credibility, e. g., his demeanor, reputation for veracity, and consistency with other evidence.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 11:20 AM   #57
Carry_24/7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2011
Posts: 801
Good answers I believe..... I also believe the death of anyone should be treated the same.....

My question was to "baseline" such an opinion amongst others.

This is a sensitive subject amongst everyone right now for sure.
Carry_24/7 is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 03:07 PM   #58
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,970
Quote:
This is a sensitive subject amongst everyone right now for sure.
A sensitive subject for sure.

Too many times we are guilty of condemning/convicting a person publicly based on whats said in the media without having all the facts. There was a discussion here on TFL recently about a carryout worker in Ohio that shot a robber in the store, chased a second BG out of the store, came back in and shot the first robber again.

Now the only thing we knew was what the media had put out and that the GJ had enough evidence to summons the shooter to the GJ....but as I read some of the posts, you would have thought there was a tape somewhere of this store clerk coming back in and blatantly shooting the shot BG again for no reason. And to top things off, AFAIK ,there had never been a statement released to the press from the store clerk as to his side of the story. Enough evidence to send someone to the GJ does not always(and often doesn't) constitute guilt of anything.

Again, we need to be really careful about claiming someones innocents/guilt based on media propaganda. Every now and then they don't have all the facts before they start broadcasting.
shortwave is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 03:38 PM   #59
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Swamp dweller
Posts: 6,187
Quote:
Again, we need to be really careful about claiming someones innocents/guilt based on media propaganda. Every now and then they don't have all the facts before they start broadcasting
Having this happen in my almost back yard sort of speak and getting all the local news reports is a joke. Station to station the reporters manage to let opinions slip into there report instead of the facts and the speculation they project is absolutely amazing. I have some insight as to what transpired due to the fact that I shoot competition with one of the officers that responded to this incident. Nuf said
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer,
ICORE Range Officer,
,MAG 40 Graduate
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 03:50 PM   #60
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
Quote:
Quote:
With respect, it always intrigues me as to why some have the idea that murdering a police officer is somehow worse then murdering anyone else.
Your stated 'police officer' scenario should be investigated, facts gathered and if need be, prosecuted the same as any other shooting.
Course, I also feel the penalty for proven murder should be extreme, no plea bargaining, no immunity and the penalty applied across the board for whomever the murderer or victim was. No exceptions. Sadly, we have people in this country sitting in prisons doing more time for traficking in marijuana then murder....that's another discussion.

It is generally treated as any other case and investigated as such. However, the social stigma surrounding it is a bit more intense. Kind of like a soldier, they do a job most others do not want to or can't. The media also tends to hype it up a lot. And of course, like soldiers or military, when you do something to one, you might as well have done it to all of them.
I would add to this that someone who perpetrates a violent crime against a police officer is often viewed as an even greater danger to society than someone who perpetrates a violent crime against a non-LEO. The thought process behind that assumption is that if someone is willing to violently assault or murder a police officer, who is already known to be armed and capable of defending himself, then what would that person be willing to do to an unarmed and helpless victim?

While the letter of the law regarding murder of a police officer may be the same as murder of anyone else, when such an event occurs the police are more likely to give it their full and undivided attention and the perpetrator of the crime is likely to recieve a harsher punishment when caught and convicted.
Webleymkv is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 03:54 PM   #61
Carry_24/7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2011
Posts: 801
Webley; all true.....
Carry_24/7 is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 04:27 PM   #62
Fishing_Cabin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2010
Posts: 720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webleymkv
The thought process behind that assumption is that if someone is willing to violently assault or murder a police officer, who is already known to be armed and capable of defending himself, then what would that person be willing to do to an unarmed and helpless victim?
Webleymkv,

I will also add that, generally speaking, that violent assault or murder of a police officer, deputy, etc, is considered a crime against society, because, the LEO, as a representitive of the society he serves, was the victim. This is why that a crime against an officer carries a stronger punishment. Or at the very least, this is what I was told years back in the academy, and have understood since then.
Fishing_Cabin is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 05:42 PM   #63
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,970
Very true Weblymkv and Fishing_Cabin .

Although I'll further add that ANY murder is an assault against society and the murderer when found guilty should be dealt with on an equal and the harshest of terms as to never have the opportunity to commit murder again.

A life should never be based on ones status in life, as sadly, it often is in our society.

The lives of my loved ones, three(and soon to be four) of which are in LE, all mean the same to me.
shortwave is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 08:59 PM   #64
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,902
Frank Ettin,

If Zimmerman qualifies for immunity against civil actions under the SYG law, would that immunity extend to the homeowners' association that Martin's family has announced plans to sue?
gc70 is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 09:05 PM   #65
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc70
If Zimmerman qualifies for immunity against civil actions under the SYG law, would that immunity extend to the homeowners' association that Martin's family has announced plans to sue?
I don't know and would need to spend a good deal more time researching Florida law than I plan to.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old March 26, 2012, 09:06 PM   #66
ScottRiqui
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weblymkv
While the letter of the law regarding murder of a police officer may be the same as murder of anyone else,
The killing of a police officer isn't even treated the same under the letter of the law. In most (if not all) states, killing a police officer warrants an automatic upgrade of the charges to "first degree murder", "capital murder", or whatever the particular state calls it.
ScottRiqui is offline  
Old March 27, 2012, 03:26 PM   #67
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
Throughout this thread, the staff asked that discussion concentrate on the Stand Your Ground law, not the Zimmerman case. Those requests were repeatedly defied.

The facts on the case are not in, and even if they were, this is a potential emotional minefield. We will not be discussing it now, or at any point in the near future.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.11232 seconds with 8 queries