Castle Doctrine

[Nats Fan]

I tried to search an updated thread but to no avail.

SO have at it!

Can I shoot somebody if they have entered my home illegally with or without a weapon?

 

[wilcam47]

I tried to search an updated thread but to no avail.

SO have at it!

Can I shoot somebody if they have entered my home illegally with or without a weapon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_self-defense_in_Maryland

 

[BradMacc82]

Castle Doctrine/Civil Immunity is on the books in MD (Nov/Oct '09 IIRC)

As long as you have reasonable fear for your/family's life, whatever force you use, up to and including lethal force, is covered.

Civil Immunity makes it sweeter, perp survives, perp/perp's family can't sue for damages.


(For once MD actually did something right!!!)

 

[BradMacc82]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_self-defense_in_Maryland

Outdated, no longer required to retreat.

 

[FnsweetS3]

http://delegatemike.com/?p=2298

In what amounts to a stealthy victory for Second Amendment advocates in Maryland, yesterday, the Governor signed into law a modified “Castle Doctrine” bill (SB-411).

This new law will provide civil immunity for a person defending their dwelling or place of business. This immunity provides that the person is not liable for damages for a personal injury or death of an individual when protecting yourself in your home. Maryland added the proviso that the doctrine only applies as long as the persons defending them selves are not convicted of a crime related to the act for which the immunity is being sought.

Second Amendment supporters should take hope in the passage of this modified “Castle Doctrine”. Not only have we been successful in defeating anti-second amendment legislation such as HB-820, (the registration bill from this past session), we have been incrementally advancing pro-Second Amendment bills into law. These advances are done without a lot of pomp and circumstance so as not to draw the attention of the gun fearing progressives.

So don’t believe that nothing is being done to recapture the liberties that the progressives have taken from us. There have been many such small victories which receive little or no press coverage. Know that you can make a difference and that your pro-Second Amendment legislators are not only killing the bad bills we are obtaining small victories every session.

 

[Nats Fan]

Man Wiki sure reads like the tax code .....

 

[Norton]

Outdated, no longer required to retreat.

You've never had to retreat within your home.

Outside of the home is a different story.

 

[Nats Fan]

Outdated, no longer required to retreat.

Man reading Wiki can be like reading the tax code!

 

[BradMacc82]

You've never had to retreat within your home.
Outside of the home is a different story.

OK, never really looked into it since CD came into effect. Back in the day I was always told you had to retreat and have no possible way out before you could escalate to lethal force, bad info is everywhere. That nugget came from PG County cop. (Should've known better...)


Never trust Wiki solely.

 

[Norton]

OK, never really looked into it since CD came into effect. Back in the day I was always told you had to retreat and have no possible way out before you could escalate to lethal force, bad info is everywhere. That nugget came from PG County cop. (Should've known better...)

There is nothing in any of the case law that I've seen to support his assertion. The presumption is that your house is the point of last retreat.

Off your property is a different ballgame.

 

[MDFF2008]

I tried to search an updated thread but to no avail.

SO have at it!

Can I shoot somebody if they have entered my home illegally with or without a weapon?

Everything here is good; but...you may run into issues if you shoot someone in the back as they are retreating.

Deadly force laws require a threat to your life.

 

[Dogabutila]

"my daughter was walking the dog outside, perp was running towards the area my daughter was at"

 

[Lex Armarum]

Thanks for playing:

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=65691

Got to thinking, for those who can't see the WC:

I'm in! Great karma, in for the Powerball.

MD resident (with valid DL), 200+ posts

Let's see... MD Perfect vs. Imperfect (couldn't just go with standard national, so I couldn't use my Intro to Law 5th Edition.... :-P:
"When evidence is presented showing the defendant’s subjective belief that the use of force was necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm, the defendant is entitled to a proper instruction on imperfect self defense....The theory underlying the doctrine is that when a defendant uses deadly force with an honest but unreasonable belief that it is necessary to defend himself, the element of malice, necessary for a murder conviction, is lacking."
—State v. Faulkner, 483 A.2d 759,769 (Md. 1984)
To summarize, it depends on the reasonability of belief...


As for Self defense, MD has a duty to retreat on the street, but the requirement does not exist when you are the victim of a robbery, or in situations where the imminent peril of attack makes retreat impossible or retreat would not remove the danger.
Case laws cited:
Marquardt v. State, 164 Md. App. 95, 140 (2005)
Sydnor v. State, 365 Md. 205, 216, A.2d 669, 675 (2001)
Duty to retreat is satisfied if the non-aggressor is either A: in a location with no avenue of escape, or B: in a locatoin where retreat is possible, and retreats to al ocation wehre retreat is no longer possible.

Assuming the above are satisfied, one must have a reasonable belief they are in iminent danger of harm, and that the force used in defense was not above or beyond what was necessary.

If you are asking about defense of habitation (referring to in-home self defense), than the defendor has to have the reasonable belief that the aggressor has to be committing a crime in the non-aggressors place of domicile, and that sufficient but non-excessive force was used.


How's that Rusty? :-D

 

[Dal1as]

Everything here is good; but...you may run into issues if you shoot someone in the back as they are retreating.

Deadly force laws require a threat to your life.

...or to your families. If a perp is retreating towards an area where let's say your kid is, well let's just say it could get ugly. You are fearing for your kids life but in shooting them in the back the state of Maryland is going to be like.

 

[Boondock Saint]

...or to your families. If a perp is retreating towards an area where let's say your kid is, well let's just say it could get ugly. You are fearing for your kids life but in shooting them in the back the state of Maryland is going to be like.

When questioning the need for a civil immunity bill, Frosh said that it was possible for one to shoot an attacker in the back in one's own home without any criminal or civil charges. He may or may not have implied that it was necessary for the attacker to be returning fire over his shoulder or something similar as he fled.

 

[BigSteve57]

When questioning the need for a civil immunity bill, Frosh said that it was possible for one to shoot an attacker in the back in one's own home without any criminal or civil charges. He may or may not have implied that it was necessary for the attacker to be returning fire over his shoulder or something similar as he fled.

This would be great to have in one's hip pocket. Do you happen to have a citation?

 

[gamer_jim]

It's not civil immunity. If the perp sues the homeowner and looses they have to pay the home owners fees. The ability to sue from the perpetrator is still in tact.

If you have a home owners insurance policy it will likely be up to them to settle with the perp or fight in court. Chances are the perp doesn't have the money to pay your bills so there isn't any penalty to them to not sue.

 

[newmuzzleloader]

everything seems geared to 'domicile' implying 'your house'. what about an outbuilding on your property? say you catch someone in your barn or workshop or shed etc. and they charge you with something in their hand. It's dark you can't tell what they have, you're skeered, BOOM.
Does castle doctrine come into play here also? or are you SOL.

 

[MDFF2008]

It's not civil immunity. If the perp sues the homeowner and looses they have to pay the home owners fees. The ability to sue from the perpetrator is still in tact.

If you have a home owners insurance policy it will likely be up to them to settle with the perp or fight in court. Chances are the perp doesn't have the money to pay your bills so there isn't any penalty to them to not sue.

Can we get Rusty or Charlie to comment on this? It was my understanding the case could not move forward under this bill unless there was some sort of torture.

 

[MDFF2008]

everything seems geared to 'domicile' implying 'your house'. what about an outbuilding on your property? say you catch someone in your barn or workshop or shed etc. and they charge you with something in their hand. It's dark you can't tell what they have, you're skeered, BOOM.
Does castle doctrine come into play here also? or are you SOL.

I don't think it applies outside the home as it's not a full "stand your ground" law.