States allow leeway in defensive force

Tresa Baldas
The National Law Journal
July 17, 2006


Recently enacted laws that give citizens more leeway in using deadly force against attackers are already being invoked as a defense in several criminal cases across the country.

Last October, Florida became the first state to pass the so-called "shoot first" or "stand your ground" law, which allows a person to use deadly force in self-defense, in their home or in a public place, without having to retreat.

In the last several months, 12 states have followed suit with different versions of the law -- partly the result of a legislative campaign by the powerful National Rifle Association.

In Florida, a tow-truck operator who allegedly shot and killed an unarmed man who drove his car from the lot without paying is using the state's new stand-your-ground law to justify his actions. Florida v. Donald Montanez, No. 06-CF-2353 (Hillsborough Co., Fla., Cir. Ct.). At least two other Florida cases are also using the law, including a man who shot another man during a fight and a gang shooting that resulted in two deaths.

In a Colorado murder case, the jury, citing the state's "Make My Day" law, ruled that a homeowner was justified in fatally shooting a man who was parked in a car outside his home because he feared that the man, who had previously assaulted him, would come into his house and hurt him again. People v. Gary Hill, No. 04CR4427 (El Paso Co., Colo., Dist. Ct.).

For more, read on: the article

'Home intruder' law vague to judge
Refuses to dismiss murder charge

Thu, Jul. 27, 2006


A Fayette judge struggled to make sense of Kentucky's new "home intruder" law yesterday, calling the National Rifle Association-backed legislation confusing, vague and poorly written.

"I'm not quite sure that the drafters had even a marginal knowledge of criminal law or Kentucky law," Circuit Judge Sheila Isaac said. "It is absolutely silent on the court's role."

Isaac rejected James Adam Clem's request to have his murder charges dismissed because of the recently enacted law, which grants immunity to homeowners who use deadly force to defend themselves from robbers or intruders.

The law says a person has the right to use lethal force if he has "reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred." It also applies if a person is attacked in a public place "where he or she has a right to be."

Clem, 27, says he killed Keith Newberg, 25, in self-defense after Newberg allegedly attacked him upon entering Clem's apartment early in the morning of Aug. 9, 2004.

Isaac sided with prosecutors, who said that whether Newberg was an intruder or had committed a crime is a factual question that jurors must decide.

"To go into whether he is immune clearly requires fact-intensive decisions" that judges should not make, Isaac said.

Prosecutors around the state have expressed concerns about the law, which they say is difficult to interpret and raises numerous questions.

In an interview yesterday, University of Kentucky law professor Robert Lawson, widely considered the state's foremost expert on criminal law, sharply criticized the law. It was approved overwhelmingly by the General Assembly this spring, and it took effect this month.

"It is the worst legislation I have ever seen in 40 years," said Lawson, the principal drafter of Kentucky's penal code, which was adopted in 1975.

Supporters of Senate Bill 38, also called the castle doctrine, said that previous law required Kentuckians to retreat from robbers breaking into their home or car.

Not so, Lawson says: Unlike many states, Kentucky never had such an obligation.

When drafting the penal code, the General Assembly voted down such a requirement, he said.

A 1931 Kentucky Supreme Court decision, Gibson vs. Commonwealth, bluntly spells out the right of self-defense without retreat.

"It is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs," the opinion states. "He does not have to."

May be state's 1st such case

Lawson said the home intruder law "is aimed at a problem that didn't exist" and will create "huge problems of interpretation."

The politically powerful NRA has convinced 15 states to pass castle-doctrine laws since 2005. The doctrine has its origins in English common law.

Supporters in the legislature, who acknowledge the NRA's influence in drafting the bill, say it is needed to protect homeowners from being sued or prosecuted for shooting intruders.

Yesterday, Judge Isaac and attorneys on both sides debated what the law means to Clem's case. It was the first time in Fayette County, and possibly the state, that the home intruder law has reached the courts.

The Kentucky Supreme Court has never ruled on the law, giving Isaac no precedent to follow. Because she is a circuit judge, her ruling does not create precedent, and it applies only to Clem's case.

Isaac said the law provides no guidance for how courts should apply the immunity provision, which bars police from even arresting somebody who defends himself.

It's not clear what the standard of proof is or how the burden of proof shifts, she said.

"We are all kind of treading on unknown water," she said.

Clem's trial starts Monday. Isaac said defense attorneys could refile their motion after prosecutors have presented their evidence.

Change in judges

Isaac is now presiding over the case. Judge Mary Noble recused herself this week.

A written order of recusal has not yet been entered. But Tucker Richardson, one of Clem's defense attorneys, contributed to Noble's Supreme Court campaign against Justice John Roach.

Noble previously has said she does not track who contributes to her campaign. Her campaign manager has said Noble learned of Richardson's donations only after the family of a victim in another case criticized her for not recusing herself in the trial of Keita Hayden, who was acquitted of murder charges.

A new state law expanding the right of self-defense could give defendants a loophole in stray bullet cases. The Sherdavia Jenkins trial may be its first test.

Miami Herald
Tue, Aug. 22, 2006

Police and prosecutors say the state's new Stand Your Ground law, which expands the right to defend yourself, may further complicate how stray bullet cases are prosecuted.

And the case that tests it may be the murder of 9-year-old Sherdavia Jenkins, felled by a stray bullet last month while she played in front of her Liberty City home.

The new law, passed last year, removes the so-called ''responsibility to run'' that made it illegal to shoot if you had a way to escape.

Now in Florida, when people feel threatened, even if they don't see a gun, they can respond by shooting, whether they're standing on a street corner, in their cars or inside their homes. And if they kill, they can't be sued by the family of the victim.

Miami Police Chief John Timoney worries that drug dealers and street toughs will be the first to benefit.

''What you're going to see is drug dealers using this to settle scores, and the Legislature has basically given them permission,'' he said.

BARS `UNLAWFUL ACTS'

But the law includes a clause prosecutors hope will blunt its effects in stray bullet cases. It doesn't cover anyone ``engaged in unlawful acts.''

Prosectors in the Jenkins case believe the language should prevent defendants Damon ''Red Rock'' Darling and Leroy ''Yellowman'' Larose from using the new law.

At the time of the shooting, Darling was a felon and prohibited from carrying a gun. Larose, say police, was in the area to buy drugs.

''I think we're going to be plowing new territory,'' Assistant State Attorney Kathleen Hoague said. ``Will it have a constitutional challenge? I don't know.''

If the theory prevails in Sherdavia's case, State Attorney Katherine Fern�ndez Rundle says the new law may not be a problem. But it can create another hoop for prosecutors to jump through.

''Whenever you have to use other laws, like carrying a gun by a convicted felon, it complicates the process,'' she said.

If the law makes it more difficult to prosecute such cases, the Legislature may need to reconsider, says State Sen. Frederica Wilson. She voted for the bill, according to state records, but she says she was out of the room at the time.

''I don't think the Legislature really researched the consequences,'' she said. ``They focused on [robbers] breaking into your house. They weren't thinking about two bad people shooting it out and an innocent child getting caught in the crossfire.''

All but 20 of the state's representatives and senators voted for the law, which was shepherded through by state Sen. Rod Smith, D-Alachua, a candidate for governor, and sponsored by State Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala.

''This law is strictly for law abiding citizens to defend themselves from harm,'' Baxley said.

Supporters insist it was carefully written, pointing to the ''unlawful activity'' clause.

''They've been claiming self defense long before this law was created to protect innocent victims,'' said Marion Hammer, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association.

Since Florida became the first, 15 other states, pressured by the National Rifle Association, have passed similar laws. Congressman Kendrick Meek, a friend of Sherdavia's family, said he worries the Florida Legislature passed ``legislation with a broad brush.''

''You have individuals at the age of 18 who have access to semi automatic assault rifles who carry them legally in the trunk of their cars,'' he said.

'HIGH NOON' PROPOSAL

If the state attorney's theory in the Sherdavia case doesn't pass muster in the courts, Fern�ndez Rundle is considering reviving her High Noon proposal, which she first suggested after 6-year-olds Randy Wadley and Renals Elan were killed in separate stray bullet cases in 1993.

''If you start mutual combat warfare using guns, and someone gets killed, you both get charged, no matter what,'' she explained.

Police who investigate cases like Sherdavia's murder like the idea.

''There's something definitely wrong here,'' said Lt. John Buhrmaster, head of the Miami police unit that investigated Jenkins' murder. ``It's not OK! It's not OK for them to be able to think that they can just discharge a weapon and shoot at anybody.''

Bill to seek 'castle doctrine' crime protection

Texas may join states that allow deadly force first against intruders

Friday, October 13, 2006

By BRANDON FORMBY / The Dallas Morning News

The way state Sen. Jeff Wentworth sees it, Texans should be allowed to do whatever is necessary to protect themselves and their property without facing prosecution.

Even if that means using deadly force as a first resort.

Mr. Wentworth, R-San Antonio, this week said he will author a bill that would give potential crime victims broader powers to protect themselves, their relatives and their property. It is patterned after a controversial Florida law passed last year that several states, mostly in the South and Midwest, are copying.

State Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, is co-authoring the bill and said in a written statement that the proposal, if passed, means "you enter at your own risk" if you break into someone's home.

Essentially, the bill would legally establish the assumption that someone criminally entering a person's home, business or vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm and would allow potential victims to use any force � including deadly force � in retaliation.

The bill would also do away with the state's "duty to retreat" provision, which states that someone may not use deadly force if a reasonable person in the same situation would have retreated. And it would protect people from being sued by the criminals or relatives of criminals they injure or kill.

"If you break into my house with intent to commit a crime, I shouldn't have to calculate, 'Does he have a knife, does he have a gun, is the gun loaded,' " Mr. Wentworth said. "I ought to be able to protect my property and my family without worrying about those other things."

About 14 states � including Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Michigan � have passed similar laws since Florida became the first state to do so last year. Dubbed "castle doctrine" laws, they are a derivative of English common law. The spirit of the castle doctrine has traditionally been upheld in court cases across the country. But Mr. Wentworth wants to see it on the books.

The laws are backed by the National Rifle Association, which gives them the moniker "stand your ground" laws because they allow possible crime victims who are in a place where they have a right to be to fight back without being second-guessed by courts.

"If this becomes law in Texas, it would put the law on the side of the victim, but not the criminal," said Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the NRA.

But gun-control advocates � who have dubbed such bills "shoot first" laws � see things differently. Zach Ragbourn, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said case law already allows people to defend themselves. The castle doctrine laws are so broad, he said, that they allow people to kill someone and then tell law enforcement they were afraid for their safety at the time.

"The law only changes things for the bad guy," Mr. Ragbourn said. "The good guys already had the law on their side. All that's changed is there is now an extra defense for somebody who shoots somebody."

But Mr. Arulanandam said even if the doctrine is law, it doesn't mean law enforcement will take people's word at face value and let killers walk.

"Investigations will go on," he said. "The legal process will continue under this law. That's not how the American justice system works."

Mr. Ragbourn said Florida is already seeing cases in which people are trying to use the broadness of the law to get away with murder.

"It's tying the courts up in knots," he said.

Jerry Dowling, a criminal justice professor at Sam Houston State University, said he doubts the bill would change much because Texas prosecutors and grand juries historically grant wide latitude to people defending themselves. The biggest change the bill would bring, he said, is protecting people from lawsuits for what the criminal code allows them to do.

In cases across the Dallas-Fort Worth area, the legal system typically gives leeway to people who use force because they feel threatened.

A Dallas County jury in August acquitted a Louisiana man of murder after he said he fatally shot a man only because he thought the man was reaching for a gun. He was found not guilty even though a weapon was never recovered from the victim.

Property owners who injure or kill intruders are rarely arrested and typically have grand juries decide whether to criminally charge them.

That was the case when a 25-year-old man was fatally shot while trying to break into a woman's home in Buckner Terrace last year. Police also deferred to a grand jury the case of a church deacon who killed a man who was trying to break into The Church of Revelation in Oak Cliff in 2003.

"It just depends on the facts of the individual case," said Rachel Raya, spokeswoman for the Dallas County district attorney's office.

Mr. Wentworth said Texans and legislators have responded positively to the bill, which he hopes to pre-file next month for the 2007 legislative session.

"I've run into no opposition," Mr. Wentworth said. "Half of the people are surprised to find we don't already have that right."

He said the bill would prevent potential victims from having to second-guess themselves while forcing criminals to think twice before breaking the law.

"I think it will decrease the incentive some people have now to break into some people's houses," he said.

"...someone criminally entering someone's home."

I can hear the wife-killer's defense now:

I am mad.
Mad I am.
How do you like your bullet, ma'am?
Do you like it in your house?
Do you like it from your spouse?
What if I could lock me in?
I could claim you then broke in!
"I didn't know it was her.
I really didn't know it, sir.
I thought it was a criminal
Breaking in that I did kill.
It really was self-defense.
There's this law; now, hence,
I'm not guilty, you see.
I thought she might kill me!"

I don't know how I feel about the shoot-first law. But then, I've (thankfully) never been victimized in my own home. It concerns me that there might be people innocently trying to get into their homes, but I also can see why people would want to protect their families.

did this happen because of the Castle Law publicity?

Lawyer: Pasadena resident fatally shot pair out of fear
Man told 911 operator he'd kill men he thought were robbing neighbor
12:00 AM CST on Wednesday, November 28, 2007

From Wire Reports The Associated Press
HOUSTON � A man who told a 911 operator he was going to kill two men he thought were burglarizing his neighbor's house fatally shot them only when they came on his property and he felt threatened, his attorney says.

Tom Lambright, who represents Joe Horn of Pasadena, said his client was just going to take a look around when he went outside Nov. 14 after hearing glass break at his neighbor's house. He had seen Miguel Antonio DeJesus, 38, and Diego Ortiz, 30, crawling into and then out of a window.

Mr. Horn went outside, armed with a 12-gauge shotgun, to see where they were heading when he came face to face with them in his front yard, Mr. Lambright said.

Mr. Horn is 61 and heavyset. The burglary suspects were young and strong enough to beat him to death, Mr. Lambright said. So when one or both of them "made lunging movements," Mr. Horn fired, killing both.

"He's trying to protect his own life," Mr. Lambright said. "He's scared."

Pasadena police planned to present the case to Harris County prosecutors within the next two weeks, officials said Monday. Then, it is expected to be presented to a grand jury. Mr. Horn has not been charged.

Mr. Lambright's description is partly at odds with the 911 call in which a dispatcher urges Mr. Horn to stay inside his house and not risk lives.

"You're gonna get yourself shot if you go outside that house with a gun. I don't care what you think," the 911 operator said.

"You wanna make a bet?" Mr. Horn answered. "I'm gonna kill 'em."

After the shooting, he redialed 911.

"I had no choice," he said, his voice shaking. "They came in the front yard with me, man. I had no choice. Get somebody over here quick."

Local activist Quanell X urged authorities to prosecute Mr. Horn.

"Mr. Horn did not have to kill those men," he said at a news conference last week outside Mr. Horn's house. "We believe that Mr. Horn became judge, jury and executioner at the same time."

Mr. Horn "literally went to pieces" after the shooting, Mr. Lambright said.

He's doing better, however, as he reads letters and e-mails and hears radio broadcasts of people supporting his actions, Mr. Lambright said.

State law allows people to use deadly force to protect themselves if it is reasonable to believe they could otherwise be killed. In limited circumstances, people also can use deadly force to protect their neighbor's property � for example, if a homeowner asks a neighbor to watch over his property while he's out of town.

Pasadena police say Horn shot 2 men in the back
Both men were hit by shotgun blasts after entering Joe Horn's front yard
By CINDY HORSWELL and ROBERT STANTON
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

The two burglary suspects killed by Pasadena homeowner Joe Horn were shot in the back after they ventured into his front yard, police disclosed Friday.

In another twist, investigators revealed that a plainclothes Pasadena detective witnessed the Nov. 14 shootings after he pulled up in an unmarked car seconds before Horn fired three shots from his 12-gauge shotgun.

The men, who had just burglarized Horn's neighbor's house, faced him from seven to 10 feet away when they ignored his order to "not move"or they would be dead, police said.

The controversial shootings have outraged minority activists but also brought an outpouring of support for Horn.

"We now have a summary documenting what we think happened," said Capt. A.H. "Bud" Corbett. "We will turn it over to the district attorney in a couple of weeks after we do an extensive review for quality control."

The district attorney will then present the case to a grand jury to determine if any charges should be filed against Horn, 61, a computer consultant, who has claimed self-defense.

The two men � Diego Ortiz, 30, and Hernando Riascos Torres, 48 � collapsed and died not far from Horn's home on Timberline in a Pasadena neighborhood.

Both were illegal immigrants from Colombia, authorities said. Torres had been deported to Colombia in 1999 after serving time for possession with intent to distribute cocaine. Both were also using fake identification cards and aliases, and their backgrounds are now being scrutinized by federal authorities to determine if they were part of a Colombian fake ID and burglary ring, authorities said.

On Friday, Corbett described the shooting scenario that had been pieced together so far.

According to a transcript of Horn's 911 call, at 2 p.m., he became concerned that his next- door neighbor's home was being burglarized after hearing some glass break.

The dispatcher repeatedly urges Horn to stay in his house but Horn states that he doesn't feel it's right to let the burglars get away.

"Well, here it goes, buddy," Horn tells the dispatcher. "You hear the shotgun clicking and I'm going."

The dispatcher replies: "Don't go outside."

Then the tape records Horn warning someone: "Move and you're dead!" Two quick shots can be heard, followed by a pause and then a third shot.

Corbett said the plainclothes detective, whose name has not been released, had parked in front of Horn's house in response to the 911 call. He saw the men between Horn's house and his neighbor's before they crossed into Horn's front yard.

Corbett believes neither Horn nor the men knew a police officer was present.

"It was over within seconds. The detective never had time to say anything before the shots were fired," Corbett said. "At first, the officer was assessing the situation. Then he was worried Horn might mistake him for the 'wheel man' (get-away driver). He ducked at one point."

When Horn confronted the suspects in his yard, he raised his shotgun to his shoulder, Corbett said. However the men ignored his order to freeze.

Corbett said one man ran toward Horn, but had angled away from him toward the street when he was shot in the back just before reaching the curb.

"The detective confirmed that this suspect was actually closer to Horn after he initiated his run than at the time when first confronted," said Corbett. "Horn said he felt in jeopardy."

Autopsy report

The wounded man crossed the street, collapsed and died, authorities said. At the same time, the other man had turned and ran away from Horn.
Horn swung his shotgun around after shooting the first man and fired at the second one after he entered the neighbor's yard, investigators said.

He was hit in the back but continued running until collapsing a few hundred yards down the street, Corbett said.

According to a final ruling, Ortiz died of shotgun wounds to his neck and torso, said Ellie Wallace, an investigator at the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office.

The report said that Torres died of shotgun wounds to his torso and upper left extremity.

Wallace could not confirm whether the men were shot in the back, saying the autopsy report only indicated they were shot in the torso.

Neither suspect was armed, but one had a "center punch," a 6-inch pointed metal tool, in his pocket that might be used as a weapon, authorities said.

Also, they were carrying a sack filled with more than $2,000 in cash and assorted jewelry believed taken in the burglary, police said.

Self-defense claim

Investigators believe a third person may have driven the men from Houston to the Pasadena neighborhood. Police could find no vehicle belonging to the pair parked in the area.
On the 911 tape, Horn mentioned a new state law that allows residents to protect their own home from intruders.

"This case is a little different," Corbett said. "We'll have to let the grand jury sort this one out."

Horn's attorney, Charles T. Lambright, said his client fired in self-defense because he feared for his life.

"One of them (suspects) moved and Joe thought he was coming towards him," Lambright said. "They were in such close proximity (to Horn) that they could be on top of him in half a second."

The fact that a police officer witnessed the shooting but did not arrest Horn is further evidence that he acted in self-defense, he said.

"You've got a trained police officer sitting there watching this, and he doesn't arrest Horn," Lambright said. "If the (plainclothes) officer thought it was not a righteous shooting, maybe the Pasadena Police Department would have arrested Mr. Horn for murder."

Civil rights activist Quanell X said he would step up the call for a murder indictment against Horn, and questioned whether the Pasadena police should investigate the case.

Quanell X said the shooting should be handled instead by the Texas Rangers and the FBI.

"I don't trust the Pasadena Police Department," he said. "Why are they just now releasing the fact that an undercover officer witnessed the whole thing? This case stinks."

DA's office: Caller threatened Joe Horn's life

By RUTH RENDON and CINDY HORSWELL
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

Authorities said Monday someone called in a death threat against Joe Horn, the Pasadena homeowner who shot and killed two men who broke into his neighbor's home last month.

The message about Horn's well-being was left on a telephone message with the Harris County District Attorney's Public Integrity Division Sunday.

The message, left about 1:50 p.m., is laced with expletives and says even if Horn is not indicted for the two deaths, he will be killed, said Vance Mitchell, a spokesman for the Pasadena Police Department.

"Don't worry about my name," the message from a male voice says. "What you better do, you better indict Joe Horn. If you don't, somebody is going to kill him, and if he goes to prison, he's going to be killed on the inside.

"They are waiting on him in prison, and we're waiting on him on the outside."

Miranda Brown, a spokeswoman for Horn's attorney, Charles Lambright, said authorities had not contacted Horn about the threat, and Brown had no comment.

Mitchell said authorities do not know who made the call.

OP/ED: PROPERTY OUTWEIGHING PEOPLE IN HORN CASE
by Lisa Falkenberg
In Joe Horn's now-infamous 911 call reporting the burglary of his neighbor's home last month, there's a particularly disturbing refrain that made many of us cringe.

"I'm not going to let them get away with this," the Pasadena homeowner tells the dispatcher several times in various ways in the moments before he shot to death the two burglars, Miguel Antonio DeJesus, 28, and Diego Ortiz, 30.

To many of us, Horn's preoccupation with stopping the crime and recovering the stolen property � "a bag of loot," as Horn described it � seemed irrational and vengeful rather than heroic.

Human life is worth more than property. It seems like a universal truth. But apparently not in Texas, or other states with similar laws.

Over the past week, I've researched the Texas Penal Code and discovered some provisions that were surprising even to this fifth-generation Texan.

If Horn doesn't get indicted, don't blame the grand jury. And don't blame Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal. Blame the section of Chapter 9 of the Penal Code that deals with protection of property.

Suspected burglar fatally shot at Harris County home

By KEVIN MORAN
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

A southwest Harris County homeowner shot and killed a man he discovered climbing into a window of his house at about 2:15 a.m. today, investigators said.

Steven Dunbar, 44, died in the window of the home in the 3400 block of Cascadia, Harris County sheriff's homicide Det. Rolf Nelson said.

The 33-year-old homeowner, Damon Barone, was asleep in the house with his wife, a son, 6, and an infant daughter when he heard a loud noise, Nelson said.

"The homeowner says he heard a loud noise, possibly a gunshot, that startled him out of bed," Nelson said. "As he got up, he said he heard another loud noise and he said the house was shaking."

Barone had retrieved a pistol he keeps and was on his way to investigate the noises when he heard glass breaking in a bedroom.

"When he entered that bedroom, he said he saw a burglar coming through a broken window," Nelson said. "He shot several times and struck the burglar several times, killing him at the scene."

Exactly what Dunbar was trying to do and why there was so much noise before the homeowner discovered Dunbar remains unclear, Nelson said.

Deputies found a back screen door on the back of the house torn from its hinges, which could account for the shaking feeling the homeowner said he noticed after he awoke, Nelson said.

"He's got a pretty extensive criminal record of felonies over the last 13 years," Nelson said of Dunbar. "He has at least 12 arrests for felonies and a half dozen convictions. We don't know if he was intent on some other crime or if it was a burglary for something he could turn into money."

The area around the shooting scene was taped off by deputies at about 3 a.m. today and the homeowner was not available for comment.

The home is in the Forest View subdivision near the intersection of FM 1093 and Addicks-Clodine.

While the investigation continued late this morning, Nelson declined to say exactly how many times Dunbar was shot and where the bullets hit him.

No charges have been filed against Barone and the case is expected to be referred to a Harris County grand jury without charges, Nelson said.

If the shooting occurred as Barone described it, Texas law allowing people to defend their homes from intruders likely will preclude charges being filed. Today's home-invasion fatality appears more clear-cut than that involving Pasadena resident Joe Horn, who shot two men allegedly trying to burglarize his neighbor's home last month.

Horn, 61, is being investigated for the Nov. 14 shootings in front of his home in the 7400 block of Timberline Drive. The two men, Diego Ortiz, 30, and Hernando Riascos Torres, 38, are suspected of breaking into Horn's neighbor's home in the middle of the afternoon.

The two men, who were in the country illegally, were confronted by Horn in his front yard after a police dispatcher told Horn not to go outside with his shotgun. Police said both men were shot in the back with a shotgun and died at the scene.

Yet another use of deadly force in which the so-called "castle doctrine" will have made absolutely no difference -- but I'm sure that won't stop its proponents from claiming credit.

House Panel Rejects Bill To Expand Right To Shoot In Self Defense

ST. PAUL � A Minnesota House committee rejected a bill Thursday that would have expanded the right of people to use deadly force to defend themselves in their homes, businesses or cars if they feel they�re in imminent danger. The measure failed on an 8-8 vote in the House Public Safety and Civil Justice Committee.

It's a huge defeat for the law abiding citizens of Minnesota.

I was a victim of a violent crime at my house when I was 19 by 4 bikers who hopped out of car and started beating me and a friend I was with. I was outside and in my own yard. I was 5' 7" and about 138 and the main guy beating me was 6'5" and about 260-270. We'd never seen these guys before. My dad saw what was happening and came flying out of the house with a shotgun, which was put away as soon as the guys got up off of us after bloodying me up pretty good. The Virginia police were more upset about Dad, a decorated military officer at his own house, than the guys that bloodied me up.

It won't ever happen to me again. And it shouldn't have to happen to anyone else. The Castle Doctrine is a good thing. In my opinion the sorry thing is that it took legislation to "give" people rights they should have already.

Of course it is hard to know what is currently the law in Rhode Island, but in most states a homeowner would have the right to defend themselves with deadly force under the circumstances described in the article. And, before the passage of whatever one wants to call the "Castle" bill in Texas, a homeowner had broad protection from prosecution under such circumstances. The addition has done nothing to expand protection for the innocent homeowner who acts to defend himself; it has done much to create mischief in trials and provide new protections for the bad guy who has no business shooting someone.

Two timely articles on that very point:

Prosecutors fear castle law's 'presumption' will allow real murderers to go free

Kaufman case doesn't fit castle law's intent, author says

Laredo man indicted in 13-year-old intruder's slaying

Associated Press

LAREDO � A man who shot and killed a 13-year-old breaking into his mobile home has been indicted for murder in a case that could test a new law giving Texans more leeway to defend themselves with deadly force.

Jose Luis Gonzalez, 63, was indicted Friday in the July killing of a teenager who sneaked into his home with three friends to steal drinks and snacks. Francisco Anguiano was shot in the back and later died at a Laredo hospital.


Details.

Castle doctrine' likely will apply in fatal shooting

Web Posted: 04/29/2008 11:14 PM CDT

Robert Crowe
Express-News
After his home was burglarized earlier this week, Thomas Thames decided to arm himself in case the intruder returned, police say.

The following night, he heard another noise at his home in the 5800 block of East Midcrown, so Thames, 39, walked downstairs. It was about 2:30 a.m. Tuesday when he once again saw a young man in his kitchen. The back door was open.

This time, Thames fired a gun at the man, who ran into the backyard, where Thames shot at him again, police said.

Ronnie Scarborough, 18, was pronounced dead at the scene.

San Antonio police spokesman Sgt. Gabe Trevino said the resident had pulled the man into his house and waited for police to arrive.


Details.

Despite the media's over-eagerness to tie a few dead bodies to the passage of the so-called Castle Doctrine, it seems to me that these cases are controlled as much, if not more so, by pre-existing laws governing deadly force in defense of property.

I don't think there will be a true test of the "castle doctrine" until someone gets shot someplace other than a person's home/yard.

Yeah, some no-bills or not-guiltys where you have a couple of car-loads of thugs shooting at one another will really stir things up.

N. Texan indicted in shooting despite 'Castle Doctrine'

DALLAS - A Kaufman County man has been charged for the shooting of a teenager who was walking across his yard with a friend, whose mother was killed in a wreck while driving the teen to the hospital.


Details.