Why did this guy get prison?

[Sweaty Bullitts]

This was in today's Sacramento Bee:

July 15, 2011

Man sentenced to 22 years in fatal shooting at Sacramento hotel

Joseph Raheem Williams has been sentenced to 22 years in state prison for a 2008 shooting death of a many outside the Double Tree Hotel in Sacramento.

Williams was convicted by a jury of voluntary manslaughter in the death of Alexander Hunter. He was sentenced by Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Michael Savage.

On Feb. 10, 2008, Hunter was celebrating his 21st birthday with family and friends at the Double Tree Hotel. About 3 a.m., Hunter left the hotel and was walking through the parking lot when a vehicle came close to hitting a family member, according to a Sacramento County District Attorney's Office news release. Williams was a passenger in the vehicle.

Officials said Hunter and his brother exchanged words with Williams and the driver of the car. The driver, Williams and two female companions got out of the car and walked toward a hotel entrance. Hunter followed Williams through the parking lot demanding a fight.
When they walked up the steps of the entrance, Hunter grabbed Williams by the shoulder, according to the news release. Williams then turned around and shot Hunter one time in the chest.

Posted by Cathy Locke

Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/crime/archiv...#ixzz1SPGqkZh9

Apparently, Williams, the shooter, was trying to avoid a fight, and the "victim", Hunter, pursued him, demanding a fight, and even grabbed him with enough force to swing him around. Why at that point was it manslaughter to shoot the attacker?

If a guy was pissed at me enough to follow me, and grabs me that hard, I'd shoot too. At that moment, being attacked from behind by someone challenging me to a fight, and not knowing what he might have in his hands, and not having any time to find out, why would shooting the attacker be wrong?

Thanks for your thoughts,

Sweaty

[nine mil thrill]

sure the victim was scrapping for a fight, but the jury probably felt that no ones' life was in immediate jeopardy or danger (at that time). deadly force must be only used as a LAST resort. it sounds like williams never even tried to flee or evade the attack.

[Quiet]

Can't use deadly force when confronted with non-deadly force.

The jury must have decided that what Mr. Williams did was not justifiable homicide [PC 197] but voluntary manslaughter [PC 192(a)].

Going straight to deadly force for being assaulted [PC 240] or batteried [PC 242] in a public space, can/will get you in trouble.

So, you should always have more than one option in your "use of force continuum". That way you can properly address lethal and non-lethal encounters.



Penal Code 192
Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. It is of three kinds:
(a) Voluntary--upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.

Penal Code 197
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was the assailant or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed; or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.

Penal Code 198
A bare fear of the commission of any of the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 197, to prevent which homicide may be lawfully committed, is not sufficient to justify it. But the circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person, and the party killing must have acted under the influence of such fears alone.

[Kid Stanislaus]

Twenty two years is too much for this offense unless there's more to the story than presented here. I'm think'n his attorney let him down.

[Agent Orange]

Yet another post that makes me support stricter CCW permit training...

[Quiet]

Twenty two years is too much for this offense unless there's more to the story than presented here. I'm think'n his attorney let him down.

He was found guilty of two charges.

(1) Voluntary manslaughter.
(2) Possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

Hence, the 22 years in prison.

Yet another post that makes me support stricter CCW permit training...

Would not have helped, since the person could not legally possess a firearm or obtain a CCW permit.

[Librarian]

Since no one in this story had CCW, I fail to see why it wound up in the CCW forum.

Moved.

[mjsweims]

A convicted felon carrying a loaded concealed weapon, then shooting someone during a fight - without knowing any more details it sounds like a reasonable sentence.

[Agent Orange]

Would not have helped, since the person could not legally possess a firearm or obtain a CCW permit.

I was referring to the OP.

[SAR_boats]

Penal Code 197
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,



Last I checked, Assault, consummated by battery, IS a felony

[Sweaty Bullitts]

Thank you all for your replies.

I know the story did not seem to involve CCW, but the issue of whether it was OK to shoot or not seemed relavent to CCW holders. Nothing in the story said Williams was a convicted felon.

My class, though described as a CCW class, was really more for security guards, and did not focus on CCW issues very much. My renewal class will be...

Thank you "SAR boats"--what you said is exactly why I asked!

[iareConfusE]

I'm still a little bit concerned with the whole" deadly force can only be used when met with deadly force" idea. I'm 140 lbs, 5'10" and I'm weak as cake. To me, a single stiff blow from anyone over 170 lbs to the head would probably kill me instantly.

Should a sucker punch or a guy asking for a fist fight not be met with my deadly force? Or should I have to wait until I'm a half pint of blood away from death before I do my quick draw and put one in him?

[USMC 82-86]

I guess being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm didn't help. If the victim had some type of weapon or was causing fear of life by let's say trying to strangle the shooter, that may have been seen as self defense. He may have still been convicted for possession of a fiream with a felony conviction.

[Burbur]

I guess being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm didn't help.

I'm sure this is what threw the whole case. Kind of hard to get past that whole "unlawful possession" bit. If he didn't have the gun, like he was ordered, there would have never been a justifiable/non-justifiable question to begin with.

[Quiet]

Penal Code 197
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,



Last I checked, Assault, consummated by battery, IS a felony

In CA...
Assault is a misdemeanor. [PC 241(a)]
Battery is a misdemeanor. [PC 243(a)]
Battery that causes serious personal injury is a felony. [PC 243(d)]
Assault with a deadly weapon is a felony. [PC 245]


Penal Code 241
(a) An assault is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by both the fine and imprisonment.

Penal Code 243
(a) A battery is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(d) When a battery is committed against any person and serious bodily injury is inflicted on the person, the battery is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years.