Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This just in from Florida...

TALLAHASSEE — An appellate court says Florida's "stand-your-ground" law allows the use of deadly force for self-protection even if an attacker or intruder is in retreat.

A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal issued that explanation Wednesday for ordering the release last month of a Tallahassee man who had been charged with first-degree murder.

The unanimous opinion may conflict with a 2nd District Court of Appeal decision in 2007. It denied "stand-your-ground" immunity to a Valrico resident because he shot a man who had retreated from his garage after an argument.

A spokeswoman for Attorney General Bill McCollum said no decision had yet been made on seeking a rehearing or appealing to the Florida Supreme Court.


Seems like maybe the courts are starting to get the message. I hope it continues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,342 Posts
Interesting.

I'd like to see the actual details of the circumstances though before I jump to any conclusions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
09-2501 JIMMY HAIR, v. STATE OF FLORIDA
http://opinions.1dca.org/written/opinions2009/08-19-2009/09-2501.pdf

The material facts of this case are not in dispute. Harper, the victim, had unlawfully and forcibly entered a vehicle occupied by Germinal, Hair, and a third person in the back seat. While Harper may have been exiting the vehicle at the time of the shooting, the action was involuntary if it occurred at all. The physical evidence was clear that Harper was still inside the vehicle when he was shot. The statute makes no exception from the immunity when the victim is in retreat at the time the defensive force is employed. The trial court’s denial based on disputed issues of material fact was therefore incorrect. That holding was also directly contrary to our express holding in Peterson that a motion to dismiss based on “Stand Your Ground” immunity cannot be denied because of the existence of disputed issues of material fact.
CONCLUSION
Petitioner was aware that Harper, the victim, had unlawfully and forcibly entered the vehicle when he was shot. Hair was therefore authorized by section 776.013(1), Florida Statutes, to use defensive force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm and was immune from prosecution for that action under 776.032(1). The motion to dismiss should have been granted and we therefore issued the writ of prohibition.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,584 Posts
Great news...:congrats:
Sounds like 2/3's of that 3-judge panel must be from TX.:image035:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,342 Posts
Completely different from the 2007 decision referenced in which the BG had apparently left the garage at the time of the shooting.....the key difference being that this time the BG was still in the vehicle when he was shot. All this one appears to do is reinforce our Castle Doctrine. Not a bad thing at all, but I don't see anything earth-shatteringly new either.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,508 Posts
Great news...:congrats:
Sounds like 2/3's of that 3-judge panel must be from TX.:image035:

Actually it appears all 3 are Texan's, the ruling was unanimous.


The unanimous opinion may conflict with a 2nd District Court of Appeal decision in 2007. It denied "stand-your-ground" immunity to a Valrico resident because he shot a man who had retreated from his garage after an argument.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
Completely different from the 2007 decision referenced in which the BG had apparently left the garage at the time of the shooting.....the key difference being that this time the BG was still in the vehicle when he was shot. All this one appears to do is reinforce our Castle Doctrine. Not a bad thing at all, but I don't see anything earth-shatteringly new either.
I agree, Its still good that its being upheld.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,206 Posts
Now that is a good law. I wish we had it here in MN.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
116 Posts
Honestly this isn't news, just an appellate court doing its job. If the guy is still the in car, how can anyone say if he was retreating. Totally different from the other case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
The link is the same case as sited in the op. The thing is, the victim and another with the BG being removed from the car when it happened. Seems he wasn't retreating but being helped to retreat. Still FL law allows you to stand your ground and who knows what the BG woulda done once outside the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Is anyone saying this isn't news bothering to read the article and grasp what it says? Who gives a crap where he was, how he was retreating... car, house... yard... garage... it doesn't matter! The decision by the appellate court says quote, "Florida's "stand-your-ground" law allows the use of deadly force for self-protection even if an attacker or intruder is in retreat."

That makes this case law. That means this decision can be used in the defense of another resident under different circumstances. Any way you slice it... THAT'S GOOD NEWS!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,001 Posts
Is anyone saying this isn't news bothering to read the article and grasp what it says? Who gives a crap where he was, how he was retreating... car, house... yard... garage... it doesn't matter! The decision by the appellate court says quote, "Florida's "stand-your-ground" law allows the use of deadly force for self-protection even if an attacker or intruder is in retreat."

That makes this case law. That means this decision can be used in the defense of another resident under different circumstances. Any way you slice it... THAT'S GOOD NEWS!
There you go again; using logic and common sense. :duh:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,260 Posts
While Harper may have been exiting the vehicle at the time of the shooting, the action was involuntary if it occurred at all.
Careful. We are not talking about shooting a BG after the attack ceases because he was voluntarily retreating and the court is saying that is OK. The retreat was not voluntary and therefore no valid retreat under the law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
This just in from Florida...

TALLAHASSEE — An appellate court says Florida's "stand-your-ground" law allows the use of deadly force for self-protection even if an attacker or intruder is in retreat.

A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal issued that explanation Wednesday for ordering the release last month of a Tallahassee man who had been charged with first-degree murder.

The unanimous opinion may conflict with a 2nd District Court of Appeal decision in 2007. It denied "stand-your-ground" immunity to a Valrico resident because he shot a man who had retreated from his garage after an argument.

A spokeswoman for Attorney General Bill McCollum said no decision had yet been made on seeking a rehearing or appealing to the Florida Supreme Court.


Seems like maybe the courts are starting to get the message. I hope it continues.
"Stand your ground" means you don't have to run and hide but can use lethal force to protect yourself, etc.

IMHO, it does NOT mean you can shoot a bad guy in the back unless the circumstances are pretty horrific and a horrific offence has taken place.

I would have to see the circumstances of this shooting before making a personal statement on it... but as far as I am concerned? (a) stand your ground means no need to retreat; and (b) use of lethal force should be warranted where a horrific offense has taken place and you have no other way of stopping the perp despite many please to stop departing. My #1 is arson.... having seen the aftermath of terrible burns and the pain and suffering it causes, even if I could not use lethal force I would be happy to pull the switch or whatever and not lose a moment of sleep (well, I would lost sleep but I would do it willingly and gladly).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,260 Posts
Then the threat is still going and deadly force is probably valid
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top