Deadly force question

[P345]

Thanks folks. Great incites and feedback.

[lhecker51]

Actually, from your questions, I don't think you have a good enough understanding of deadly force period (regardless of inside/outside, armed/not armed, etc). Your hypothetical scenarios do not have anywhere near enough information.

If you're using deadly force against someone, you'd better be able to articulate defending yourself or someone else against life threatening or serious bodily injury (look up 243(f)(4) PC for an idea of SBI). As Falconis pointed out, you have to Articulate - In Detail.

Just because "someone" is "armed" and they "attack" you, whether it's inside OR outside your home, doesn't give you an automatic green light to use deadly force. You need to describe, In Detail, the totality of the circumstances and using words/terms like "someone", "armed", and "attack" are extremely vague, ambiguous, and subjective. Also, just because you can explain it doesn't mean that's good enough - people will have to believe you and agree that what you did was reasonable under the circumstances.

How is it that LEO's have better protection regarding use of force than a citizen in their home? This is my perception. I only wish we had the same.

I know the police have better lawyers and a strong union to back them in a shooting whereas I have neither.

It matters who you articulate it to and when: The LEO that responds or your lawyer.

As an officer, you must document all statements made. These statements are then sent to the DA for possible prosecution. I personally would make no statement other than the minimum in order to clarify basic facts such as "He kicked in my door, I felt my life was in danger." or "He had a knife and I saw him throw it in the hedge over there". Just enough, but no details that you would be required to document and could be used against me. I would then invoke my right to an attorney and remain silent.

[lhecker51]

As has been said, the test is would a reasonable person in your shoes be in fear of death or serious bodily harm.

Do they mean California reasonable or Texas reasonable? I believe reasonable people are a rare commodity in this state. A reasonable person would not wear my shoes if they knew where they have been

[lhecker51]

To LEO's: Are your departments lethal force policy or rules of engagement available to the public? To ensure I am in compliance with the law, I might as well use them as a guideline when developing a response to a threat that will stop the threat yet keep me out of prison.

[Tincon]

Do they mean California reasonable or Texas reasonable? I believe reasonable people are a rare commodity in this state. A reasonable person would not wear my shoes if they knew where they have been

Reasonable in the jurisdiction you are in. Some counties might be more reasonable than others...

[CBR_rider]

LEO's at work(sometimes) have what seems to be more leeway regarding uses of force for several reasons: A good LEO IS more trained in use of force(what is reasonable/not, how to use it, availability of multiple tools) than the average citizen, LEO's are generally in uniform/performing lawful duties so they aren't drunk/starting random fights/etc, and the penal code authorizes the use of force for reasons in addition to simply defending oneself. LEO's also have no duty to retreat when faced with opposition.

As far as making your own "use of force policy," my biggest, non lawyerly suggestion would be to create hypothetical scenarios in your head (starting with simple to more complex ones) and be able to describe why EXACTLY you are using force in a given situation.

[FanTactical]

LEO's at work(sometimes) have what seems to be more leeway regarding uses of force for several reasons: A good LEO IS more trained in use of force(what is reasonable/not, how to use it, availability of multiple tools) than the average citizen, LEO's are generally in uniform/performing lawful duties so they aren't drunk/starting random fights/etc, and the penal code authorizes the use of force for reasons in addition to simply defending oneself. LEO's also have no duty to retreat when faced with opposition.

As far as making your own "use of force policy," my biggest, non lawyerly suggestion would be to create hypothetical scenarios in your head (starting with simple to more complex ones) and be able to describe why EXACTLY you are using force in a given situation.

I think I would make one change to your statement "LEO's also have no duty to retreat when faced with opposition." LEO's are expected NOT to retreat when faced with opposition - short of cases where the opposition is overwhelming, and then only to regroup or to wait for backup.

Subject to interpretation of CA's Stand Your Ground law, citizens do not have a duty to retreat either. Some states, however, do require a citizen to retreat and only authorize deadly force when there is NO other avenue of escape. Kinda sucks. Hope they change/have changed that.

It would be nice if the laws were written such that individuals involved in the commission of a violent felony automatically forfeited their rights to the same legal protections as their victim. Maybe someday.

[ap3572001]

I understand the use of deadly force when some is inside someone's home, however, what if the assailant is outside. Is deadly force justified in the following cases:

1. someone is trespassing in your fenced-in backyard - you challenge them on why they are there and they attack
a. they are armed
b. they are not armed

2. someone is outside but shoots into your house (think drive-by or home invasion)? Can you shoot back?

For the purpose of this discussion - they make the first hostile move.

Thanks.

If someone is in my back yard, I ask them what they are doing there and they attack me and I am AFRAID for my my life , I can do what I need to do to survive. Armed or not.

If someone outside shoots into Your house ....... And You dont see who its is , You cant just start shooting outside.

[Samuelx]

How is it that LEO's have better protection regarding use of force than a citizen in their home? This is my perception. I only wish we had the same.

1st, what do you mean by "better protection" specifically?

2nd, are you comparing LEOs in their own homes with citizens in their own homes or LEOs on the job in general with citizens in their own homes?

[55chevypost]

Read some great questions and answers as it applies to use of deadly force. Something missing from responses is, the test of reasonableness is "would an officer with the same/similar training and experice have acted/reacted in the same manner". And yes i've been in a handful of OIS.

[Samuelx]

Read some great questions and answers as it applies to use of deadly force. Something missing from responses is, the test of reasonableness is "would an officer with the same/similar training and experice have acted/reacted in the same manner". And yes i've been in a handful of OIS.

I left that out because the 4th Amendment and Graham v Connor does not apply to non-LE/government. Ergo, the Reasonable Officer standard does not apply to a non-LE citizen. And because of that, IMO, it could be argued that non-LEOs have more leeway with regards to using force because they aren't expected to have the same training and experience and their rules of engagement are not as strict.

[Ninety]

I have another one for you guys..

Are you allowed to go into your back yard armed to determine if there is indeed a threat?

I have , on two occasions now, had police lock down the street and circle the neighborhood from above. I have asked if they want me to check my back yard and was told "sure go ahead" to which my response was "would you like to come with?" With the answer of " I'm not going back there until I have back up."

So would I be breaking the law to have my weapon with me on my gated property to check the back out houses and garage? And if I did come across an armed trespasser be with in my rights to defend myself?

Do I have an obligation to allow the officers into my backyard?
If the officers see something illegal while in my backyard, CAN they push the issue and bring charges against me?

[Warhawk014]

I have another one for you guys..

Are you allowed to go into your back yard armed to determine if there is indeed a threat?

I have , on two occasions now, had police lock down the street and circle the neighborhood from above. I have asked if they want me to check my back yard and was told "sure go ahead" to which my response was "would you like to come with?" With the answer of " I'm not going back there until I have back up."

no well trained officer is going to go into a back yard with someone they dont know without backup. for all they know you might be setting up an ambush. or an ambush is already in place and neither the officer or you know about it. the person they are chasing might be hiding back there.

So would I be breaking the law to have my weapon with me on my gated property to check the back out houses and garage? And if I did come across an armed trespasser be with in my rights to defend myself?

no you would not be breaking the law if you had your own weapon on your private property.

if the cops already there, you should not be in your backyard with a weapon to begin with. they might mistaken you for the perp. better to just stay inside and make sure your residence is secure. let the cops handle the outside.

Do I have an obligation to allow the officers into my backyard?
If the officers see something illegal while in my backyard, CAN they push the issue and bring charges against me?

is the officer/s chasing a suspect, if so yeah they are gonna go back there wether you like it or not. exigent circumstances. and if the officers see something illegal "in plain view" yes you will be in hot water.

just my opinion, not to be construed as legal advice. also protocol varies between different agencies, so this might not be true with the cops in your area.

[Ron-Solo]

I have another one for you guys..

Are you allowed to go into your back yard armed to determine if there is indeed a threat?

Yes, but it may not be in your best interests

I have , on two occasions now, had police lock down the street and circle the neighborhood from above. I have asked if they want me to check my back yard and was told "sure go ahead" to which my response was "would you like to come with?" With the answer of " I'm not going back there until I have back up."

That's a clue. Whoever they are looking for poses a hazard

So would I be breaking the law to have my weapon with me on my gated property to check the back out houses and garage?

No

And if I did come across an armed trespasser be with in my rights to defend myself?

Only if attacked and deadly force is appropriate

Do I have an obligation to allow the officers into my backyard?

If they are in what is referred to as "fresh pursuit" they do not need your permission. If you obstruct, them you could go to jail for interfering. If they find the suspect in your back yard, and you obstruct, you could be charged with harboring a fugitive.

If the officers see something illegal while in my backyard, CAN they push the issue and bring charges against me?

If they are legally in your yard, yes.

Don't keep illegal stuff in your yard.

[Ninety]

LOL , I tend not to keep Illegal stuff in my yard..But I have a big back yard and CA has some really crazy laws... who knows what could be back there...

And thank you both for your replies.