Chaper 6: The Law Governing the Use of Force

Vocabulary flashcards covering justification vs. excuse, self-defense, castle doctrine, defense of property, and constitutional limits on law enforcement use of force.

Excuse Defense

A defense that focuses on the actor; the act itself was wrongful, but the defendant should not be held criminally blameworthy due to a condition affecting their capacity or volition.

• ex. insanity, duress, involuntary intoxication

Justification Defense

A defense that focuses on the act itself, where the conduct is considered legally permissible or not wrongful under the circumstances.

• ex. self-defense

excuse

"I did something wrong, but I shouldn't be blamed."

justification

"What I did was legally justified under the circumstances."

Master Rule for Justification

The rule stating that every justification defense is conditional and the force used must remain within the boundaries of

1. necessity,

2. proportionality, and

3. objective reasonableness

Once the actor exceeds those boundaries, the justification disappears and criminal liability may apply

Parental Discipline Privilege (MPC §3.08)

A qualified privilege permitting parents/guardians/acting in loco parentis to use physical force to safeguard or promote a child's welfare, provided it does not create a substantial risk of death, serious bodily injury, disfigurement, extreme mental distress, or gross degradation.

Parental Discipline Privilege requirements

1. Authority → person must have legal responsibility for the child.

2. Purpose → force must be disciplinary, corrective, or protective.

3. Proportionality/reasonableness → force must be reasonable under the circumstances.

Parental Discipline Privilege reasonableness factors

child's age, size, physical condition, misconduct, instrument used, location of force, and resulting injury

Privilege disappears when force becomes

excessive or creates substantial risk of serious bodily harm

Self Defense or Defense of another:

the elements to evaluate whether an act of force for self defense is justified include:

1. Unprovoked attack / defender free from fault

2. Imminent threat of unlawful harm

3. Proportionality of the defensive force

4. Reasonable belief that force was necessary

In determining what force is reasonable in self defense, states and court decisions generally apply

both a subjective and objective test

Subjective Test for Self-Defense

A test evaluating whether a nonaggressor honestly believed that force was necessary for self-defense.

• Ex. Did the defendant honestly believe force was necessary?

Objective Test for Self-Defense

A test evaluating whether a nonaggressor's honest belief in the necessity of force comported with what a reasonable person would believe under the same circumstances.

• Ex. Would a reasonable person in the same circumstances have held that belief?

  
  

Reasonable Mistake of Fact

A principle establishing that a defendant can be justified in self-defense even if the perceived threat was not real, as long as the mistake was both honestly held and objectively reasonable.

Reasonable Mistake of Fact ex

Defendant is threatened with what appears to be a real gun, but the weapon turns out to be a realistic toy → potentially justified because the belief was reasonable under the circumstances

Rules of self defense of another

a person may come to the aid of another and use necessary and reasonable force to defend the other person against unlawful force or interference

1. The person coming to the assistance or defense of another must reasonably believe that the facts are such that the third person would be privileged to act in self defense

2. Also must reasonably believe that such intervention is necessary to protect the third person against unlawful force or interference

Traditional Alter Ego Rule

A rule in defense of others where a rescuer steps into the legal position of the person being defended, losing the defense if the defended person was actually the aggressor regardless of the rescuer's reasonable belief.

Imperfect Self-Defense

An honest but unreasonable belief in the need for self-defense that reduces criminal liability (such as reducing murder to voluntary manslaughter by negating malice) rather than completely excusing it.

Deadly Force

Force that is likely to cause or is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.

Deadly force is justified only when there is a reasonable belief that it is immediately necessary to protect against:

1. Imminent death

2. Imminent serious bodily harm

3. An imminent forcible felony

• Ex. kidnapping, forcible rape, armed robbery

Duty to Retreat

A minority rule requiring a person to retreat before using deadly force if they know a complete and safe avenue of retreat exists and retreating would not increase danger.

Duty to retreat before one could use deadly force (castle doctrine and stand your ground laws have this in the minority)

• Minority rule.

• Retreat required before deadly force if the defendant knows a complete and safe avenue of retreat exists.

• No duty to retreat if retreat would increase danger.

• Defendant must have actual knowledge of the safe retreat route.

Stand Your Ground Law

A majority rule establishing that a person who is lawfully present and not engaged in unlawful conduct has no duty to retreat before using force or deadly force if self-defense requirements are met.

Stand Your Ground Law requirements

• Majority rule.

• No duty to retreat when:

  • person is lawfully present,

  • person is not engaged in unlawful conduct, and

  • requirements for self-defense are otherwise satisfied.

Initial aggressor can regain self-defense when:

1. They completely withdraw from the conflict and communicate the withdrawal, OR

2. They used only non-deadly force but the other person suddenly escalates to deadly force.

• A shoves B. B suddenly pulls a gun. A may regain the right to defend against the deadly threat.

If a person asserting self defense is engaged in unlawful activity such as the

commission of a crime, or is himself the unlawful aggressor, the right of self defense does not exist

How to regain self defense:

1. Escalation: Non-deadly aggressor faces unlawful deadly force (must exhaust safe escape before using deadly force).

2. Withdrawal: Aggressor completely withdraws in good faith and gives clear notice to victim.

Castle Doctrine

A doctrine permitting occupants who are assaulted in their home by a trespasser to stand their ground and use reasonable, necessary force without a duty to retreat.

Castle Doctrine is an exception to the duty to retreat.

Generally, no duty to retreat from one's home.

BUT co-occupants are different: jurisdictions disagree about whether the castle doctrine applies when the attacker also legally lives in the home.

Under some approaches, a person may have to retreat from a shared dwelling if they can safely do so.

"Make My Day" Rules

Rules adopted by some states that put no limits on the use of deadly force by the occupant of a dwelling in response to a trespasser.

Stand your ground law generally create a presumption that

a dwelling occupant has a reasonable fear of imminent peril or death whenever another person unlawfully and forcefully enters the dwelling

• Not necessary for the homeowner (or other legitimate occupant) to prove the intruder presented the threat of death or serious bodily harm

Battered Woman Syndrome (NOT an independent legal defense)

An evidentiary tool using expert testimony on the psychological effects of past abuse to help a jury evaluate reasonable belief and imminence in a self-defense claim.

Unless the defendant can show she has a reasonable belief that the abuser presented

an “imminent” threat of death or serious bodily harm, deadly force was no justified

• duty to retreat

some states have taken steps to provide some relief for

battered women who are charged with violent crimes

cycle of violence

1. Tension-building

2. Acute battering

3. Loving/contrite "honeymoon" phase

Learned Helplessness

A psychological effect resulting from chronic trauma, financial dependence, fear, isolation, and failed interventions that makes leaving an abusive relationship extremely difficult.

imminence

Traditional self-defense usually requires an immediate threat.

• In domestic violence situations, the defendant may argue that a seemingly non-imminent threat was functionally inevitable because of the history and circumstances of the abuse.

State law varies. Battered woman syndrome evidence does not automatically

establish self-defense everywhere

Property can generally be protected only with reasonable

NON-DEADLY force

• Deadly force cannot be used solely to protect property

Katko v. Briney (1971)

An Iowa Supreme Court case establishing that a property owner cannot use mechanical devices like spring guns to protect property with deadly force.

Tennessee v. Garner (1985)

A Supreme Court decision holding that police cannot use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless necessary to prevent escape and probable cause exists that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury.

Graham v. Connor

A Supreme Court case establishing that excessive-force claims against law enforcement must be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's objective reasonableness standard from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene.

Graham Factors

The three factors used to evaluate objective reasonableness of police force: 1. Severity of the crime, 2. Immediate threat to officers or others, and 3. Active resistance or attempt to evade arrest.

Implied Consent Laws

Laws requiring a driver to submit to breath, blood, or urine analysis when police officers have reasonable grounds to believe the driver is impaired.

State v. Cline

A case holding that an officer's use of a PIT maneuver during a minor traffic infraction constituted an unreasonable and excessive use of force under the Fourth Amendment.

Modern Rule on Resisting Unlawful Arrest

The rule establishing that a person may not physically resist an arrest by a known or identifiable police officer, even if the arrest is unlawful, unless responding to an officer's excessive or unlawful deadly force.

Missouri v. McNeely (2013)

A Supreme Court decision establishing that the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not automatically create an exigency allowing warrantless blood draws in every DUI case.

Birchfield v. North Dakota (2016)

A Supreme Court case holding that warrantless breath tests are permitted incident to a lawful DUI arrest, but warrantless blood tests generally require greater Fourth Amendment protection.