Mediaboss Marketing

Stand your ground laws have taken the spotlight in the news lately, in part due to the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman trial in Florida. As a result, some Carolina residents have begun to question the status of North Carolinas stand your ground law.

As of December 1, 2011, citizens of North Carolina had the legal right to defend themselves with deadly force in their homes, vehicles and workplace without the duty to retreat. Stand your ground laws exist in at least 25 states in addition to Florida and North Carolina.

These laws, sometimes called Make My Day laws or Shoot First, Ask Questions Later laws cover the extent to which a person can legally go to defend himself or others and the exceptions that apply.

North Carolina stand your ground law is addressed in NCGS 14-51.2 and 14-51.3 and are summarized below:

A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has the lawful right to be if either of the following applies:

The second scenario is sometimes referred as the Castle Doctrine, recognizing that ones home is ones Castle and that you should be able to legally defend yourself and your family when an intruder or trespasser poses a threat.

There are exceptions to the use of deadly force in self-defense against law enforcement officers and bondsmen. However, both must be acting in the lawful performance of their official duties and must identify themselves to you unless you reasonably should know their identity.

Before the enactment of Stand Your Ground statutes, and in states that dont currently have these laws, a person generally has a duty to retreat before being justified in using deadly force against an attacker. Without such statute, if you can avoid confrontation or get away, you must or you will risk criminal prosecution for assault, or depending on the outcome, manslaughter or murder.

A person is also limited to using reasonable force in the absence of a Stand Your Ground law. This means that a person cannot respond with deadly force when faced with non-deadly force such as a punch with a fist.

Until the enactment of these new statutes, the only justifiable use of force in self-defense was the return of the same level of force used against them; for example, a punch for a punch.

North Carolinas Stand Your Ground law removes the duty to retreat and generally allows the use of deadly force when in ones home, car or workplace, under reasonable circumstances. The law presumes that such an invasion gives the occupant the requisite fear required to use deadly force in defense of themselves or their family.

Should you find yourself in a situation in which you are being accused of a crime when you were acting in self-defense, it is important to consult an attorney about your legal options. I am experienced in this area of law and our Raleigh law firm can assist you in protecting your rights. Call 919-615-2473

Protecting your Privacy ~ Your privacy is our primary concern. At Kirk, Kirk, Howell, Cutler & Thomas, LLP., we understand the importance of protecting your privacy and will never share your contact information with a 3rd party. Contacting our law firm does not imply any form of attorney-client relationship.

Continue reading here:
Can You Stand Your Ground in North Carolina? - Kirk Kirk Law

As of December 1, 2011, citizens throughout North Carolina had the legal right to defend themselves from a threat of violence without first being required to retreat. This was the date that North Carolina's Stand Your Ground law took effect.

Since the death of Trayvon Martin on February 26, 2012 and with the ongoing criminal case of George Zimmerman in Florida, North Carolina's own self-defense laws have been questioned. Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder felony charges in the shooting death of 17-year-old Martin; he asserted that he acted in self defense and should be exempt from prosecution under Florida's Stand Your Ground Law.

Stand Your Ground laws exist in at least 25 states, including North Carolina and Florida. Sometimes called "Shoot First" laws or "Make My Day" laws, the extent to which one can legally go to defend himself or another are dictated by these rules.

North Carolina Stand Your Ground law ( N.C.G.S. 1451.3) currently reads, in part, as follows:

[A] person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has the lawful right to be if either of the following applies:

a) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another.

b) Under the circumstances permitted pursuant to G.S. 1451.2, generally that you are in your home, workplace or car and are in fear for yours or another's life

Subsection (b) is often referred to as the Castle Doctrine. This subsection recognizes that a home should be one's castle and that you should be allowed to legally defend yourself and your family when an intruder or trespasser poses a threat.

There are exceptions to the use of deadly force in self defense against the following people:

In addition, if the person has retreated or has stopped the threatening behavior, the use of deadly force may no longer be justified because the threat is no longer considered imminent.

Prior to enactment of stand your ground laws, and in states that don't currently have these laws; you generally have a duty to retreat before you will be justified in using force against an attacker. That means that if you can get away and avoid a confrontation, you must, or you risk criminal prosecution for assault, battery or, depending on the outcome, manslaughter or murder.

You also, generally, are limited to using reasonable force in the absence of a Stand Your Ground law similar to that in North Carolina. You cannot respond with deadly force when you have been punched with a fist, for example. Exchanging blow for blow has typically been a justifiable use of force in self defense, but using deadly force to respond to non-deadly force has not.

Stand your ground laws remove the duty to retreat and generally allow for the use of deadly force under reasonable circumstances. You do not have to try to get away before reacting to a threat with reasonable, and sometimes deadly, force.

In the wake of the Martin/Zimmerman criminal saga, the North Carolina legislature is considering eliminating the stand your ground law in this state. Entitled the "Gun Safety Act," a proposed bill in the 2013 session seeks to completely remove the right to defend yourself from another using deadly force in your home, your car, your workplace or other place in which you are legally present.

House Bill 976 would repeal North Carolina's Stand Your Ground law and revert the right of self defense in this state back to the common law, which requires an attempt to retreat before force is justified. The Castle Doctrine would be left intact, allowing the use of reasonable and even deadly force, to protect you or your family in your home.

The bill also seeks to change laws related to the storage of firearms and concealed-carry weapons permits.

If you have been charged with a crime after acting in self defense, you should seek the assistance of an experienced criminal lawyer immediately. Self defense is not a cut-and-dried legal issue. As we have seen with the Zimmerman trial, there is always more than one account of what actually happened at a crime scene.

Self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning you admit that you attacked or caused harm to another person, but that you were justified in causing that harm to protect yourself or another. To succeed on a self defense claim, you must not:

Convincing a prosecutor, judge or jury that you acted in self defense should be left in the hands of an experienced defense attorney.

North Carolina vs. M.W. Charge: Charge: Robbery with A Dangerous Weapon (4 Counts), First Degree Burglary, Conspiracy to Commit Robbery with A Dangerous Weapon Facing: 12 - 17 years in prison Result: Dismissed

An incarcerated defendant accused our client of participating in the robbery of a group of youth at a party. We were able to raise doubt as to the credibility of this individual. In the end, the prosecutor dismissed these charges, citing a lack of evidence.

Go here to read the rest:
Self Defense In North Carolina: Can You Stand Your Ground?

The acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin has cast a renewed spotlight on Florida's "stand your ground" law. While Zimmerman's attorneys did not mount a "stand your ground" defense in his case, the law has become the subject of national attention, and was discussed during the trial.

So, what is the law, when did it pass, and where else can you find similar laws on the books? Here's a rundown of everything you need to know.

What is Florida's stand your ground law?

It's a law that allows people to, well, stand their ground -- pretty much anywhere -- instead of retreating if they reasonably believe doing so is necessary to "prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."In short, after the law was passed, people could defend themselves even outside of their homes -- with deadly force if necessary -- if they believed someone was trying to kill them or seriously harm them.

Here's an NPR report with more detail on the law.

When was the law passed?

It was passed in 200539-0 in the state Senate and 94-20 in the state House, and then-Gov. Jeb Bush (R) signed it.

Who was advocating for it? And who opposed it?

The National Rifle Association lobbied hard for the measure, while law enforcement officials like Miami's police chief opposed it. Defenders of the law often cited the 2004 case of James Workman, a retiree asleep in his RV who shot an intruder and had to wait months before prosecutors decided he engaged is self-defense. Opponents worried the law would encourage the use of deadly force.

After Saturday's verdict in the Martin case, Florida's state Senate Democratic leader called for a second look at all self-defense laws. But given the GOP-tilt of the Florida legislature, it's unlikely the stand your ground law will undergo major changes.

What has the impact been?

In the five years after the law was passed, the rate of justifiable homicides in Florida tripled. Defenders of the law cite a drop in the state's violent crime rate.

Which other states have similar laws on the books?

Since Florida became the first state to pass an explicit stand your ground law, more than 30 others have passed some version of it, with the help of agroup called the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a organization that promotes conservative bills. Here's a 2012 map of stand your ground laws nationwide

What's next?

In the wake of the Florida case, we can expect an increase in calls to repeal or at least revisit the laws across the country."I think that's up tothestate. I thinkthey should revisit that," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)said Sundayon NBC's "Meet The Press."

An effort to repeal a stand your ground law in New Hampshire recentlyfell short,and repealing or changing legislation is generally difficult, so opponents of the laws will face uphill climbs in seeking the changes they want to see happen. Expect to hear a lot from opponents of the stand your ground law about a Texas A&M University study that found states with such laws have more homicides than states without them.

Updated at 10:48 a.m.

Sean Sullivan has covered national politics for The Washington Post since 2012.

Go here to see the original:
Everything you need to know about stand your ground laws ...

When a Florida jury deadlocked on the first degree murder charge against software developer Michael Dunn, the state's controversial "Stand Your Ground Law" was once again hoisted into the media spotlight.

Dunn was convicted on four other charges in the case, in which he fired 10 times at an SUV after an argument with the teens inside about how loud their music was, and will likely be sentenced to a minimum of 60 years behind bars.

Michael Dunn Trial: Mistrial Declared on Murder Charge in Loud Music Killing Case

As in the case of George Zimmerman, acquitted in the killing of Trayvon Martin, the public outrage was often directed or misdirected, at the Florida law.

Many, including legal commentators who should know better, repeatedly citing the statute as a crucial issue in both cases.

And yet neither defendant invoked the controversial aspects of Florida's law. In fact, both defendants argued basic self defense law that would have been similar in just about every state in the nation.

The relevant portion of the law of self defense in Florida reads: "A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if: He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself"

The controversial section of that law relates to the fact that there is no "duty to retreat," meaning that in non-stand your ground states one must, in most cases, first attempt to get away if he or she can.

In Florida, however, there is no such requirement and the shooter may "stand his or her ground" when firing in self defense.

But the duty to retreat was not an issue in either Dunn or Zimmerman. In both cases the defendants argued that deadly force was used because they "reasonably" believed that it was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily injury. That, is at its core, no different than the law in almost every other state.

Why George Zimmerman Might Have Been Found Guilty in Ohio

Zimmerman claimed Trayvon Martin was pummeling him and Dunn that he had a shotgun pointed at him by a young man saying "I'm going to kill you." If Dunn's account were true -- and it was contradicted by other witnesses -- then retreat hardly seems like an option.

Regardless of what one thinks of the defenses (and because of Zimmerman's injuries and the testimony of eyewitnesses, his defense was far stronger legally than Dunn's claim, which was only supported by his own testimony) the controversial aspect of the law was hardly the issue.

The other major and controverted change in Florida's law was that one who claims he or she was justified in using deadly force may seek to avoid any liability, criminal or civil, by proving at a pre-trial hearing that the shooting was justified.

So a Florida judge can rule that someone who has shot and killed doesn't even have to go to trial and that he or she should be immune from civil lawsuits as well. Yet neither Dunn nor Zimmerman sought that sort of immunity.

Others have focused on the fact that Dunn need only "reasonably" believe that there was an imminent threat, even if there was no actual threat at all. For example The New York Times reported Sunday:

"The trial, which lasted six days before deliberations began on Wednesday, was the latest courtroom test for Florida's expansive self-defense statutes, including the so-called Stand Your Ground provision. Under the law, Mr. Dunn needed only to have been convinced that he saw a shotgun, whether or not one was present.

Yet that is no way unique to Florida or stand your ground laws. The most common example is when someone is confronted with what turns out to be a toy gun, he or she still has the right to use deadly force in any state if he or she "reasonably" believed the weapon was real, even if turns out there was no actual threat.

Others mistakenly claim these are "stand your ground" cases because the entire self defense statute is read to Florida jurors with the stand your ground language included. But, of course, reading jury instructions with some language that is inapplicable to the case at hand is common in all types of cases and says nothing about whether the controversial aspects of the law are at issue.

Yet others note that certain jurors in the Zimmerman case, for example, cited the stand your ground law to explain their verdict. The inexact language of jurors doesn't change the reality that the law would have been the same in any other state and that none of the controversial parts of the law were relevant.

The only state with a significantly different law when it comes to classic self defense is Ohio where rather than the prosecution having the burden of proof, a defendant who claims self-defense adopts the burden to prove the case. There is no question that placing the burden on the defendant can make a conviction far easier.

Is it possible that gun owners in Florida feel more emboldened to use their weapons because of the expansive protections embedded in the law? Sure, but that does not change the legal analysis.

Is it possible that Dunn not having a duty to retreat made his defense slightly stronger? It's theoretically possible, but based on the facts presented it becomes just that, theoretical.

I am no fan of stand your ground laws but I am a fan of accuracy when it comes to sensitive and potentially explosive trials and verdicts.

Dan Abrams is ABC News' Chief Legal Correspondent and Anchor of "Nightline."

Visit link:
Florida's Stand Your Ground Law Did Not Determine Either ...

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

302

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

The Senate Criminal Justice Committee voted on Tuesday for a proposal shifting the burden of proof in stand your ground cases to the prosecution.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Bill Cotterell, Democrat correspondent 6:36 a.m. EDT October 21, 2015

Lucia McBath, the mother of slain teen-ager Jordan Davis, talks with state Sen. Audrey Gibson, D-Jacksonville, about gun legislation Tuesday after the Senate Criminal Justice Committee approved a bill allowing concealed weapon permitholders to carry guns openly. The panel also approved an expansion of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, shifting the burden of proof to the prosecution to show a shooting was not justified under the 2005 Florida law.(Photo: Bill Cotterell/Democrat)

The Senate Criminal Justice Committee voted on Tuesday for a proposal shifting the burden of proof in stand your ground cases to the prosecution.

Under a recent Florida Supreme Court ruling, defendants have to prove they had a reasonable fear of injury, or were properly defending others, when seeking to avoid trial under the 2005 Florida law that removed the duty to retreat in a dangerous confrontation.

Lucia McBath, the mother of slain teenager Jordan Davis, pleaded with the committee not to enhance the stand your ground defense. Michael Dunn, the man who fired into a car blasting loud music at a filling station, claimed he saw a weapon before shooting. It took two trials to convict Dunn, who is serving lifein prison.

TALLAHASSEE DEMOCRAT

Campus Carry bill rifles through Higher Ed committee

The stand your ground law encourages Floridians to shoot first and ask questions later, McBath told the committee. This is a dangerous bill that would make it even harder to protect communities from gun violence.

Sen. Rob Bradley, R-Fleming Island, said prosecutors should always bear the burden of proof in criminal cases. He said the states highest court made a classic overreach in ruling that a defendant had to prove justification for using a weapon rather than deciding the state attorney had to prove illegal intent.

Bradleys bill (SB 344) also would allow successful defendants to be reimbursed for legal costs if they get a charge dismissed in a pre-trial hearing.

TALLAHASSEE DEMOCRAT

Senate panel advances open-carry gun bill

Read or Share this story: http://on.tdo.com/1LIAxUq

08:12

03:43

02:29

02:45

09:28

04:27

08:07

01:29

01:50

01:46

02:15

09:53

02:18

01:49

02:31

06:45

05:25

20:41

01:57

03:04

07:56

04:23

05:46

08:01

03:01

04:23

06:45

06:12

01:08

03:59

0) { %>

0) { %>

Excerpt from:
Committee shifts burden of proof for stand your ground