💕
Criminal Law • Justification
CRIMLAW#013
Legal Definition
A person may use deadly force in self-defense if they are: (1) without fault; *(2)* confronted with unlawful force; and *(3)* threatened with imminent death or great bodily harm. Deadly force must be both reasonable and necessary.
Plain English Explanation
Self-defense is whatever reasonable defensive measures someone must take in order to either repel an attack or prevent further harm from an attack.
In other words, though people generally don't have any obligation to retreat from a threat, their engagement with a threat must walk a fine line in order to avoid becoming the aggressor themselves. This is especially true when it comes to the use of deadly force.
The law recognizes that sometimes deadly force is justified when it comes to self-defense, but only when a few specific elements are present in the fact pattern:
First, the person claiming self-defense must be "without fault." In other words, if the person who killed someone in self-defense provoked the situation in some way, then the law is less interested in their innocence.
Second, the person who killed someone in self-defense must have done so in response to an unlawful force against them. In other words, if someone is using lawful force against you (like a police officer arresting you, or a citizen making a lawful citizen's arrest), you're not allowed to defend yourself.
Third, the person who killed someone in self-defense must have been threatened with either an imminent, immediate possibility of being killed or being seriously injured. For example, there are many ways that a person can be stabbed with a knife that wouldn't necessarily result in death. However, it is reasonable to assume that being stabbed with a knife could kill you, or could at least cause great bodily harm. As such, the law would support your use of deadly force to repel such an attack.
In other words, though people generally don't have any obligation to retreat from a threat, their engagement with a threat must walk a fine line in order to avoid becoming the aggressor themselves. This is especially true when it comes to the use of deadly force.
The law recognizes that sometimes deadly force is justified when it comes to self-defense, but only when a few specific elements are present in the fact pattern:
First, the person claiming self-defense must be "without fault." In other words, if the person who killed someone in self-defense provoked the situation in some way, then the law is less interested in their innocence.
Second, the person who killed someone in self-defense must have done so in response to an unlawful force against them. In other words, if someone is using lawful force against you (like a police officer arresting you, or a citizen making a lawful citizen's arrest), you're not allowed to defend yourself.
Third, the person who killed someone in self-defense must have been threatened with either an imminent, immediate possibility of being killed or being seriously injured. For example, there are many ways that a person can be stabbed with a knife that wouldn't necessarily result in death. However, it is reasonable to assume that being stabbed with a knife could kill you, or could at least cause great bodily harm. As such, the law would support your use of deadly force to repel such an attack.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob hates Sam. Sam's mother recently died from cancer. One day, Bob sees Sam walking by and decides it's a good day to harass Sam. He runs up to Sam, screams profanities in Sam's face, and decides to describe in great detail how Bob would perform sexual intercourse with Sam's deceased mother. Sam snaps and pulls out a knife. Bob leaps back, pulls out a gun, and shoots Sam dead. [Result:] Bob was confronted with unlawful force and, depending on how close Sam was to Bob, it may have been a reasonable threat of imminent death or great bodily harm. However, Bob was an asshole and went above and beyond to provoke Sam. This isn't to say Bob didn't have a right to defend himself from Sam, but the law may not be willing to excuse Bob's use of deadly force since he is likely at fault for the circumstances to some degree.
Related Concepts
In most states, is deadly force permissible in the defense of property?
What type of force may be used to defend a dwelling?
When may an aggressor use self-defense against their victim?
When may deadly force be lawful during crime prevention?
When using deadly force in self-defense, when does a person have a duty to retreat?
