If you’re a drug dealer and someone breaks into your home, the Castle Doctrine does not apply.
EDINBURG — After a man fatally shot a robber inside his home when he swiped the intruder’s gun and used it against him near Elsa, the circumstances of the Aug. 15 incident remain unclear and no charges have yet been filed.
This incident is not unusual as similar home invasions this past year have led to shootings, with some homeowners facing criminal charges — not for killing intruders but for other illegal activity.
The Castle Doctrine, which became Texas law in September 2007, gives anyone in their home, vehicle or places of business or employment, the right to use deadly force if they believe they are in immediate danger.
But the self-defense law doesn’t exempt a homeowner from everything.
In February, McAllen police responded to a call of shots fired on the 4800 block of West La Vista Avenue where several men tried to storm a house, setting off a shootout.
Two men were shot to death and no one was charged in the killings. But police later found more than 1,700 pounds of marijuana inside the home.
McAllen Police Chief Victor Rodriguez said they charged the homeowner with felony drug charges because although he was defending himself he was also engaging in criminal activity, which the Castle Doctrine does not allow.
“You can’t assert Castle law to protect yourself from your criminal actions,” he said.
Rodriguez said that some home invasions that result in a shootingcan be drug-related or have another criminal element involved.
San Juan Police Chief Juan Gonzalez said he has had similar experiences with home invasions.
“We do come across cases where it turns out the house was a drug house,” he said.
He added it’s important to take everything into consideration when investigating a home invasion, including the homeowner’s history.
In efforts to protect residents, Gonzalez also teaches gun safety to law-abiding homeowners.
Since 2007, the police chief has taught a concealed-weapons class and is quick to point out to his students that they need to be careful when using deadly force.
“The Castle Doctrine means people don’t have to retreat but there’s a misconception about that,” he said. “People need to know that they need to be in imminent danger for this to apply.”
Gonzalez said he tells his students that utilizing deadly force for theft of property can leave them susceptible to legal issues.
“You will always be more protected (legally) if you’re protecting yourself rather than your property,” he said.
For example, Gonzalez said his officers responded to a shootout in September after a homeowner believed he was about to have property stolen from two gang members.
The homeowner chased after the suspects in his pickup truck and ended up shooting one of the men, causing their truck to rollover. The man was charged with aggravated assault for shooting the gang member and injuring the other as a result of the crash, he said.
As for the Aug. 15 shooting, Sheriff’s Office spokesman J.P. Rodriguez said it is still unknown if it has a criminal aspect to it.
“We’re reviewing everything before there is a determination on whether charges will be filed,” he said
Source: http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_2acf9212-2be1-11e4-9e82-0017a43b2370.html
“People need to know that they need to be in imminent danger for this to apply.”
Nope. People must have a reasonable fear that they are in imminent danger, not necessarily KNOW it, and that ain’t splitting hairs, IT’S THE LAW.
Correct. And also correct that it’s NOT splitting hairs, it’s an important difference, thanks for pointing it out.
For example, let’s say Bob walks to work one day, where a man pulls a gun on him and threatens to kill him. Bob fears for his life, and kills the man before the man can kill him..
After the fact it turns out the gun was fake.
Did Bob break the law because he wasn’t actually in imminent danger? Absolutely not. Bob had a reasonable belief his life was in danger (as judged by the the legal practice of “the reasonable man”…would a reasonable man had considered that situation to be a danger to his life?), and therefore lethal force was legally authorized.
Great example, Bryan. Of course, reasonable fear wouldn’t be someone is knocking your door at 3am in the morning and you open the door and shoot them.