Mississippi Deadly Force Rules

[GHF]

Folks -

I may be doing some project work in Mississippi soon. As part of the process, I have confirmed that my Florida CCW is good.

I then went to Handgunlaw.us to find out the deadly force rules. I found the following under SEC. 97-3-15. Homicide; justifiable homicide.:

Quote:

(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or omission of another shall be justifiable in the following cases:

(a) When committed by public officers, or those acting by their aid and assistance, in obedience to any judgment of a competent court;

(b) When necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in overcoming actual resistance to the execution of some legal process, or to the discharge of any other legal duty;

(c) When necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in retaking any felon who has been rescued or has escaped;

(d) When necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in arresting any felon fleeing from justice;

(e) When committed by any person in resisting any attempt unlawfully to kill such person or to commit any felony upon him, or upon or in any dwelling house in which such person shall be;

(f) When committed in the lawful defense of one's own person or any other human being, where there shall be reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury, and there shall be imminent danger of such design being accomplished;

Questions:

1. Is this the full relevant law in Mississippi?
2. Does anybody know of any other explaination(s) of this law?
3. Does anybody have a source of case law on this situation?
4. It appears that there is no requirement to retreat. Am I reading this correctly?
5. No limitation on civil suits after a Righteous Shoot is indicated. Is there one?
6. What is the process after event - automatic arrest, seizure of gun, grand jury action resolves, etc.?

[PascalFleischman]

I'm no expert, but as a Memphis resident, I'm often in MS. I believe MS was the 2nd state, after Florida, to enact "Castle Doctrine" styled laws. I believe MS is pretty liberal with most things, although you can't carry in ANY sporting events, and a few other technicalities. Procedurally, I believe it'd probably be juristictional whether or not your taken into custody or had your gun siezed. The MS State Troopers are the licensing agent, so maybe a phone call into them might clarify things for you.

[cmurphy]

Questions:
Is this the full relevant law in Mississippi?
Does anybody know of any other explaination(s) of this law?
Does anybody have a source of case law on this situation?
It appears that there is no requirement to retreat. Am I reading this correctly?
No limitation on civil suits after a Righteous Shoot is indicated. Is there one?
What is the process after event - automatic arrest, seizure of gun, grand jury action resolves, etc.?


I am a MS resident.
I will find the Castle Doctrine Bill for you, but we now have no requirement to retreat when in your home, vehicle, or place of business. The new law states that self defense is assumed and they must prove you did not act in self defense. There is civil protection under the new law as well. I don't know the process after an event. That very well might come down to the officers working the scene and circumstances surrounding.

Let me find the Castle Doctrine. I'll post it here.

[cmurphy]

This is from 97-3-15 as well:
(3) A person who uses defensive force shall be presumed to have reasonably feared imminent death or great bodily harm, or the commission of a felony upon him or another or upon his dwelling, or against a vehicle which he was occupying, or against his business or place of employment or the immediate premises of such business or place of employment, if the person against whom the defensive force was used, was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, occupied vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof or if that person had unlawfully removed or was attempting to unlawfully remove another against the other person's will from that dwelling, occupied vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof and the person who used defensive force knew or had reason to believe that the forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. This presumption shall not apply if the person against whom defensive force was used has a right to be in or is a lawful resident or owner of the dwelling, vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof or is the lawful resident or owner of the dwelling, vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof or if the person who uses defensive force is engaged in unlawful activity or if the person is a law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his official duties;





(4) A person who is not the initial aggressor and is not engaged in unlawful activity shall have no duty to retreat before using deadly force under subsection (1) (e) or (f) of this section if the person is in a place where the person has a right to be, and no finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the person's failure to retreat as evidence that the person's use of force was unnecessary, excessive or unreasonable.





(5) (a) The presumptions contained in subsection (3) of this section shall apply in civil cases in which self-defense or defense of another is claimed as a defense.





(b) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant acted in accordance with subsection (1) (e) or (f) of this section. A defendant who has previously been adjudicated "not guilty" of any crime by reason of subsection (1) (e) or (f) of this section shall be immune from any civil action for damages arising from same conduct.