At 03:53 PM 8/8/2001 -0700, Black Unicorn wrote:
From: "Sandy Sandfort" <sandfort@mindspring.com>
[...] In California, there is the presumption that anyone in your house (at least after dark, though I'd have to research that) is there with the intent of causing death or great bodily harm. He doesn't have to do anything overt like raise a crowbar. So you can just shoot first and ask questions later.
I didn't realize any states but Virginia still held this old "burglary" definition. Are you certain that's current law?
Not quite current - the cite you guys need is CA Penal Code 198.5, which says that a person who uses deadly force, within their residence, against another person, shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death of great bodily injury (and hence has a defense to a homicide charge) if - 1. The intruder is not a member of the family or household; and 2. The intruder is entering, or has entered forcefully and unlawfully; and 3. The defender knew of the forceful and unlawful entry .. but CA appellate courts have been quick to uphold convictions for borderline cases, as in _State v. Brown_ 6 Cal App 4th. 1489 (3rd Dist, 1992), where entry by a hammer-wielding man onto an unenclosed front porch, where only an unlocked screen door stood between the intruder and the defender, was not considered entry into a "residence" for purposes of 198.5, and the defender was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon for shooting the hammer-wielder. Generally, people interested in the topic of self-defense under California law would do well to read Penal Code sections 197-200, and the cases interpreting those statutes.