Wrong house! - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Wrong house!

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Lowcountry of South Carolina
    Posts
    2,039
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    Nope, no baby momma's going to sue, Florida has a Castle Doctrine
    Unfortunately, all that means is that they won't WIN a suit. That doesn't mean they can't force the resident to have to pay lawyer fees etc. for defending in a civil suit.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alabama Highlands
    Posts
    146
    Thats what I'm talking about, he refused to be a victim.
    Jason Le˛dhas

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,719
    Quote Originally Posted by whodat2710 View Post
    Unfortunately, all that means is that they won't WIN a suit. That doesn't mean they can't force the resident to have to pay lawyer fees etc. for defending in a civil suit.
    As I understand it, that's exactly what it means. The FL statute covering SYG and Castle Doctrine types of immunity says:

    776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
    (1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

    ETA: I read a little further and found more information regarding how immunity is protected in the above-described circumstances:

    (3) 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 is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

    Being "immune from....civil action" says to me that no case will be heard, tried or even considered as long as the shooter was cleared by police and prosecutors under one of those specific sub-sections.*

    Blues

    *With the caveat covered in the edited in, added information. If a case is brought, considered or tried, the state then covers the expenses for the protected shooter.
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Lowcountry of South Carolina
    Posts
    2,039
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    As I understand it, that's exactly what it means. The FL statute covering SYG and Castle Doctrine types of immunity says:

    776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
    (1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

    ETA: I read a little further and found more information regarding how immunity is protected in the above-described circumstances:

    (3) 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 is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

    Being "immune from....civil action" says to me that no case will be heard, tried or even considered as long as the shooter was cleared by police and prosecutors under one of those specific sub-sections.*

    Blues

    *With the caveat covered in the edited in, added information. If a case is brought, considered or tried, the state then covers the expenses for the protected shooter.
    DAMN YOU! Now I'm gonna have to dig through SC laws. Nice post!

  6. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,719
    Quote Originally Posted by whodat2710 View Post
    DAMN YOU! Now I'm gonna have to dig through SC laws. Nice post!
    HA! As it turns out, it wasn't my research. I happened to catch most of the Zimmerman trial get under way today, and when I saw your post, I was reminded that that code was covered in one of the more active Zimmerman threads from last year. S&W645 was the first to post it, which is a little weird, because he didn't seem to think that the immunity described therein was umm....'scuse the pun, bullet-proof, but it was posted and discussed subsequent to his post and I think it's fair to say that there was a good amount of consensus that it would protect someone whom police and prosecutors deemed was involved in a defensive shooting under the SYG and/or Castle Doctrine statutes.

    So believing at the time that Zimmerman would have been immune from civil or criminal action(s) if the shooting he was involved in had been deemed justifiable under SYG or CD, I think now that the shooter in this thread is as safe as a statute can make him, notwithstanding S&W645's concerns about lawyers earning their money by circumventing such statutes referred to above.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  7. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Lowcountry of South Carolina
    Posts
    2,039
    True to my word, I delved into the SC Code of Law and found the following, which is almost exactly what you have in FL.

    "SECTION 16-11-450. Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil actions; law enforcement officer exception; costs. [SC ST SEC 16-11-450]

    (A) A person who uses deadly force as permitted by the provisions of this article or another applicable provision of law is justified in using deadly force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of deadly force, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known that the person is a law enforcement officer. "

    (B) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of deadly force as described in subsection (A), but the agency may not arrest the person for using deadly force unless probable cause exists that the deadly force used was unlawful.

    (C) The court shall award reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of a civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (A).

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast