Castle Doctrine Question

[Magnum]

My memory is a little foggy on this. I did some searching every where, and could not find anything. Was there legislation some time ago on the Castle Doctrine for Maryland? I think it was in March of this year. And let me guess, it did not pass?

 

[Conundrum]

MD has a Castle Doctrine way of viewing the law.

 

[3rdRcn]

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=839

Hope that helps ya.

 

[novus collectus]

It wasn't really a "castle doctrine" bill because MD is already a castle doctrine state, but rather it was more of a stand-your-ground law and also civil immunity if you defended yourself on the street and in your home.
You have no duty to retreat in your own home in MD, you are allowed to confront the person and you are allowed to use deadly force if necessary to defend against "an attack upon one's dwelling", but I think you could still be sued. This bill would have changed the civil liability part as I understand it.

http://mlis.state.md.us/2006rs/fnotes/bil_0000/sb0870.pdf

It wasn't passed and I am not sure if it even made it out of committee.

 

[Magnum]

Thanks for the info guys. The Castle Doctrine I was looking to see if we had, is the NRA version of the Castle Doctrine, where we have the right to stand our ground anywhere, not just in our homes. In other words, the same CD Law that Florida, WV, Virginia, and numerous other states have passed.
From what you guys have said, we definetlly do not have that version. Oh, geez, I better stop here before I say something that should not be said here.

 

[novus collectus]

Thanks for the info guys. The Castle Doctrine I was looking to see if we had, is the NRA version of the Castle Doctrine, where we have the right to stand our ground anywhere, not just in our homes. In other words, the same CD Law that Florida, WV, Virginia, and numerous other states have passed.
From what you guys have said, we definetlly do not have that version. Oh, geez, I better stop here before I say something that should not be said here.

I think even VA has a must seek retreat and no stand your ground understanding of law. I think their stand your ground law did not pass a few years ago.

 

[Magnum]

Yes, you are right. I was trying to think of some states off the top of my head. Some of the states that have the CD that I would like Maryland to have, are the states like: Alabama, Arizona, Oklahoma, Florida, etc. You get the idea. Hell would have to freeze over when Maryland passes it.

 

[novus collectus]

Yes, you are right. I was trying to think of some states off the top of my head. Some of the states that have the CD that I would like Maryland to have, are the states like: Alabama, Arizona, Oklahoma, Florida, etc. You get the idea. Hell would have to freeze over when Maryland passes it.

I like Florida's.

 

[gamer_jim]

I do not understand this yet. I'm considering buying my first handgun soon for the purpose of self defense in my own home.

I read the bill:

http://mlis.state.md.us/2006rs/fnotes/bil_0000/sb0870.pdf

"...justification for use of deadly force if the person reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent... harm."

Would someone breaking into my home be justification enough? Or would I have to wait for them to approach me, or after they harm me once before I could open fire?

Did this bill pass and is it law?

Where else can I find out the legalities of defending my home?

Also, is there a proper way to explain to the 911 operator that you just shot an intruder in self defense of your home and what do you do with the firearm until the police arrive?

Thanks,
Jim

 

[novus collectus]

I do not understand this yet. I'm considering buying my first handgun soon for the purpose of self defense in my own home.

I read the bill:

http://mlis.state.md.us/2006rs/fnotes/bil_0000/sb0870.pdf

"...justification for use of deadly force if the person reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent... harm."

Would someone breaking into my home be justification enough? Or would I have to wait for them to approach me, or after they harm me once before I could open fire?

If they enter your home by force you have a right to confront them and to use deadly force to protect your dwelling. In other words, as I understand it, you have a near perfect legal defense for using lethal force if a reasonable person in your shoes would fear for their life and someone breaking into your home should qualify as such a threat to a reasonable person.
If someone breaks into your home and immediatley surrenders by laying spread eagle on teh ground, then it might be harder to argue that a reasonable person would still think they or their dwelling were in imminent danger.

Maryland recognizes two varieties of self-defense — the traditional one, which we have sometimes
termed “perfect” or “complete” self-defense, and a lesser form, sometimes called “imperfect” or “partial”
self-defense. Although “perfect” self-defense is universally recognized in the United States, not all of our
courts recognize the lesser variety as a separately defined defense, and there is no universal agreement on
the precise elements of either variety. We shall focus, as we must, on the current state of the Maryland law,
but, as we consider some of our earlier cases and cases from other States, we need to take into account
the overall context in which those cases were decided....



.....We noted that “perfect” or traditional self-defense, is a complete defense to a charge of criminal
homicide — murder or manslaughter — and, if credited by the trier of fact, results in an acquittal. The
elements, or requirements, of that defense, as we enumerated them in Faulkner and Dykes, are:
“(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe
himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious
bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant;
(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;
(3) The accused claiming the right of self-defense must not have
been the aggressor or provoked the conflict; [Note: this case is not talking about citizen's arrest, being robbed or when in the home and the dwelling is being attacked, in those cases you are allowed to confront and have no duty to retreat.] and
(4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and
excessive, that is, the force must not have been more force than the
exigency demanded.”

In Faulkner, we first adopted the concept of “imperfect” self-defense, as articulated in that case
by the Court of Special Appeals. See Faulkner v. State, 54 Md. App. 113, 458 A.2d 81 (1983). The
prospect of “imperfect” self-defense arises when the actual, subjective belief on the part of the accused that
he/she is in apparent imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from the assailant, requiring the use
of deadly force, is not an objectively reasonable belief. What may be unreasonable is the perception of
imminent danger or the belief that the force employed is necessary to meet the danger, or both. As we said
in Faulkner, quoting from the Court of Special Appeals opinion:

“Perfect self-defense requires not only that the killer subjectively believed
that his actions were necessary for his safety but, objectively, that a
reasonable man would so consider them. Imperfect self-defense,
however, requires no more than a subjective honest belief on the part of
the killer that his actions were necessary for his safety, even though, on an
objective appraisal by a reasonable man, they would not be found to be
so.”

“the only substantive difference between the two doctrines, other than their
consequences, is that, in perfect self-defense, the defendant’s belief that
he was in immediate danger of death of [sic] serious bodily harm or that
the force he used was necessary must be objectively reasonable. In all
other respects, the elements of the two doctrines are the same.”

http://www.courts.state.md.us/opinions/coa/2001/47a00.pdf

Did this bill pass and is it law?

I think the comittee hearings are in the next few weeks.

Where else can I find out the legalities of defending my home?

MDShooters
But seriously, you have to look at court precedent from a number of different cases to get a gist, and even then it is filled with gray areas.
Being good at googling helps immensely. Also this has been discussed on this board a few times.

Also, is there a proper way to explain to the 911 operator that you just shot an intruder in self defense of your home and what do you do with the firearm until the police arrive?

A police officer would have to answer that one, but what I would do is to inform the operator that I am the resident and to notify the police the resident is armed and will remain armed for my safety until the police arrive.

(I am not a lawyer)

 

[haoleboy]

I'll put my $ .02 in....

I hope you don't, but if you have to shoot someone in defense...don't wound them, Kill em'
Lethal Force means Lethal.

About calling the cops after.....call 911 and tell them you shot an intruder dead and you still armed.

 

[MDHunter]

HB1071?

Doesn't HB1071 propose to protect residents from criminal prosecution AND civil liability if the resident is forced to protect themselves in the event of a home intrusion? I believe the hearing on it is scheduled for early March...

 

[Jim Sr]

Doesn't HB1071 propose to protect residents from criminal prosecution AND civil liability if the resident is forced to protect themselves in the event of a home intrusion? I believe the hearing on it is scheduled for early March...

Hearing: March 4

 

[redduck21502]

Also, is there a proper way to explain to the 911 operator that you just shot an intruder in self defense of your home and what do you do with the firearm until the police arrive?

Also when they arive, I remember Massad Ayoob once said to make sure you tell the police that you want to sign the complaint form (or whatever form they have). This establishes that you are the victim in the case, not the dead guy. I am guessing it makes it better if you have to go to court and they have to produce the arrest report or complaint report with you being the victim. I suppose it makes it a little harder for you to be prosecuted as a murderer.

 

[bulabula]

Just got this in the email from NRA-ILA Alerts WRT Castle Doctrine. If its in the wrong place (or wrong), mod's feel free to delete this.

Maryland “Castle Doctrine” Bill to be Heard Tomorrow!
Please Contact the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Today!

Senate Bill 449 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee tomorrow, Wednesday, February 20.

Introduced by State Senators E. J. Pipkin (R-36) and David Brinkley (R-4), SB449 would restore the right of self-defense in Maryland and eliminate the requirement that a victim retreat from a violent attacker. This “Castle Doctrine” legislation is vital to protecting law-abiding citizens from being criminally prosecuted for protecting themselves or their family.

SB449 is scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee tomorrow at 1:00 pm in 2 East, Miller Senate Building, Annapolis.

Please contact the members of the committee and respectfully urge them to support this important self-defense legislation that prevents victims from becoming criminals.


Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee
State Senator Brian E. Frosh (D-16), Chair
(410) 841-3124, (301) 858-3124, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3124 (toll free)
brian.frosh@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Lisa A. Gladden (D-41), Vice Chair
(410) 841-3697, (301) 858-3697, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3697 (toll free)
lisa.gladden@senate.state.md.us

State Senator James Brochin (D-42)
(410) 841-3648, (301) 858-3648, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3648 (toll free)
jim.brochin@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Jennie M. Forehand (D-17)
(410) 841-3134, (301) 858-3134, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3134 (toll free)
jennie.forehand@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Larry E. Haines (R-5)
(410) 841-3683, (301) 858-3683, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3683 (toll free)
larry.haines@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Nancy Jacobs (R-34)
(410) 841-3158, (301) 858-3158, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3158 (toll free)
nancy.jacobs@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Alexander X. Mooney (R-3)
(410) 841-3575, (301) 858-3575, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3575 (toll free)
alex.mooney@senate.state.md.us

State Senator C. Anthony Muse (D-26)
(410) 841-3092, (301) 858-3092, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3092 (toll free)
anthony.muse@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20)
(410) 841-3634, (301) 858-3634, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3634 (toll free)
jamie.raskin@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Bryan W. Simonaire (R-31)
(410) 841-3658, (301) 858-3658, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3658 (toll free)
bryan.simonaire@senate.state.md.us

State Senator Norman R. Stone, Jr. (D-6)
(410) 841-3587, (301) 858-3587, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3587 (toll free)
norman.stone@senate.state.md.us

 

[Magnum]

This is the Castle Doctrine that I was referring to in my first post. This one, I would like to see pass. And it will be on the floor tomorrow.