State v. Clothier

753 P.2d 1267 (1988)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was awakened by his barking dog at his home around 3:30 a.m. D let the dog out of the house. A few minutes later, the dog returned. D returned to bed, but the dog continued snarling. D took a revolver from his nightstand and went to the dining room. He looked out the window and observed someone reaching in the window of his automobile parked on the driveway. The window on the car was broken and the door opened. D's garage door opener was located inside the vehicle. D wanted to scare the person away so he fired a warning shot. D then saw someone run behind the car and across the yard. He fired another shot, aiming down at the ground. D told his girlfriend to call the police. D stepped outside of the house and saw 15-year-old Seanan Picard lying injured on the driveway. Picard later died from a gunshot wound to the head. D was acquitted by the jury on the theory that he acted in defense of his property. P appealed on the jury instruction that a person may use deadly force to defend a dwelling or property other than a dwelling, without limiting such instruction to situations in which human life and safety are imminently endangered. P had submitted a proposed jury instruction which stated: 'A person is justified in using force likely to cause death or great bodily harm in defense of property not a dwelling only when he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [another].' The court gave the following instruction: 'Use of force in defense of dwelling. A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that it appears to him and he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon his dwelling.' 'Use of force in defense of property other than a dwelling. A person who is lawfully in possession of property other than a dwelling is justified in the threat or use of force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating an unlawful interference with such property. Only such degree of force or threat thereof as a reasonable man would deem necessary to prevent or terminate the interference may intentionally be used.'