Good shoot? Manslaughter charges brought in Michigan garage burglary shooting

[C3D]

Was it a good shoot, or not?

tl;dr Man shoots into his closed windowless detached garage through a closed door because he believes a burglary is in progress, killing a young man.

Michigan man charged after fatally shooting teen who broke into garage

A Michigan man fatally shot a teen who broke into his garage and is now facing a manslaughter rap — sparking controversy over the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law. Sivan Wilson, 17, was with six oth…

nypost.com

 

[pshift]

If he fired 2 shot from inside the home to inside of his garage, he should be OK. It's questionable with 5 shots fired afterwards, and then going back into his house, and reloading on top of that. SMH.

They needed to be taught a lesson but ....

 

[Saltwater60]

I’d have to look up the law in Michigan to apply it. I don’t really care enough to do that so I will apply NYS’s law and say they were both unoccupied dwellings and he should have stayed inside his home and called police. Shooting anyone breaking into an unoccupied dwelling in NYS is a bad move.
Now personally I do not think I’d shoot someone for breaking into my car or garage even if legally allowed to. I do not think a piece of property is worth a human life. I value life more than property. I guess the same could be said for homes because the assailant could truly mean you no harm but breaking into a house is very different and the chance of something to go wrong increases exponentially.

 

[dwa12479]

Well, I cant say I condone shooting through a windowless door without being able to see whats behind it. Nor would I condone shooting at fleeing perps in a residential neighborhood with no regard for your neighbors. Both actions are very reckless and make gun owners look bad.

On the other hand, if these yutes were doing something productive with their time instead of breaking and entering in the middle of the night, they wouldn't be getting shot at.

 

[Brawny71]

A lot of variables. They do have Castle Doctrine but I’m still looking for their definition. Justification is also hard to find in their penal code. Stand your ground is also there. https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/Publications/Firearms.pdf

The unanswered question: What were all these good kids doing in someone else’s garage without permission. I know I know. But ultimately, not in my personal definition of taking life.

[MI Law] 780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
Sec. 2. (1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.
(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.

 

[Zerex]

“This defendant crossed the line by firing outside his home at fleeing persons,”

Oops...............

I never shoot through a door...................doors cost too much.

Fleeing deer are ok to shoot.............

 

[Brawny71]

Also hard to verify imminent threat thru a closed door with no window.

 

[C3D]

A lot of variables. They do have Castle Doctrine but I’m still looking for their definition. Justification is also hard to find in their penal code. Stand your ground is also there. https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/Publications/Firearms.pdf

Just FYI, in New York State the castle doctrine extends to your garage but only if it is part of the main house. A separate structure is not part of your castle. A garage attached to the main house that does not have a passage door into the house does in fact count as part of the castle.

Also if you live in an apartment or condo, nothing outside of your apartment (including garages, hallways, elevators) is part of your castle.

 

[Brawny71]

Just FYI, in New York State the castle doctrine extends to your garage but only if it is part of the main house. A separate structure is not part of your castle. A garage attached to the main house that does not have a passage door into the house does in fact count as part of the castle.

Also if you live in an apartment or condo, nothing outside of your apartment (including garages, hallways, elevators) is part of your castle.

Correct….. but only after Duty to Retreat and Justification have been met. Each state defines each differently. Also why I poster the state applicable laws.

Texas (as an example) extends their Castle Doctrine to hotel rooms

 

[C3D]

Correct….. but only after Duty to Retreat and Justification have been met. Each state defines each differently. Also why I poster the state applicable laws.

Texas (as an example) extends their Castle Doctrine to hotel rooms

Yes of course, I only wanted to point out the law in New York on these points, since I assume most visitors here are NYers.

But I don't think you were saying there is a duty to retreat inside the "castle" portions of your home? That's not the case. Of course the justification requirements always apply.

 

[Saltwater60]

Just FYI, in New York State the castle doctrine extends to your garage but only if it is part of the main house. A separate structure is not part of your castle. A garage attached to the main house that does not have a passage door into the house does in fact count as part of the castle.

Also if you live in an apartment or condo, nothing outside of your apartment (including garages, hallways, elevators) is part of your castle.

Good luck not getting charged if you shoot someone in an attached garage. Laws matter little in this state.

 

[Saltwater60]

Yes of course, I only wanted to point out the law in New York on these points, since I assume most visitors here are NYers.

But I don't think you were saying there is a duty to retreat inside the "castle" portions of your home? That's not the case. Of course the justification requirements always apply.

What justifications apply in your home or castle in NYS? I’m not aware of any since burglary of an occupied dwelling is justifiable use of deadly force under article 35 in NYS.

 

[TopShot]

He Over Did It !
You're only suppose to shoot to stop the threat.
He allowed his emotions ( Rage ) get the best of him.
C.B.

 

[Cavalry]

Just FYI, in New York State the castle doctrine extends to your garage but only if it is part of the main house. A separate structure is not part of your castle. A garage attached to the main house that does not have a passage door into the house does in fact count as part of the castle.

Also if you live in an apartment or condo, nothing outside of your apartment (including garages, hallways, elevators) is part of your castle.

6 words then shut up. I was in fear of my life. Your attorney can take care of the details that the now deceased had your stolen gas can and BBQ lighter in his possession and was attempting to douse you in gasoline while holding the lighter.

 

[Brawny71]

Yes of course, I only wanted to point out the law in New York on these points, since I assume most visitors here are NYers.

But I don't think you were saying there is a duty to retreat inside the "castle" portions of your home? That's not the case. Of course the justification requirements always apply.

In NYS, you still have a duty to retreat until no longer safe to do so depending on situation. Even in your castle. No saying I fully agree, just explaining.

 

[C3D]

In NYS, you still have a duty to retreat until no longer safe to do so depending on situation. Even in your castle. No saying I fully agree, just explaining.

That is not correct. The meaning of the words "castle doctrine" are to establish that you have no duty to retreat within your dwelling. This is enshrined in the New York Penal Code Section 35.15 2.(a)(2), which reads in relevant part (emphasis added):

A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person . . . if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no​

duty to retreat if he or she is . . . in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor . . .​

That's not to say that retreating within your dwelling, when safe to do so, is not the wiser course of action. It is. Legally, however, doing so is not required.

This is separate and apart from the Article 35 requirements for use of deadly force in the case of a burglary, which also does not impose a duty to retreat. I will not go through those because as @Cavalry said don't use that as a reason to shoot someone.

 

[MikeM]

6 words then shut up. I was in fear of my life. Your attorney can take care of the details that the now deceased had your stolen gas can and BBQ lighter in his possession and was attempting to douse you in gasoline while holding the lighter.

Thats 7 words.

 

[Brawny71]

That is not correct. The meaning of the words "castle doctrine" are to establish that you have no duty to retreat within your dwelling. This is enshrined in the New York Penal Code Section 35.15 2.(a)(2), which reads in relevant part (emphasis added):

A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person . . . if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no​

duty to retreat if he or she is . . . in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor . . .​

That's not to say that retreating within your dwelling, when safe to do so, is not the wiser course of action. It is. Legally, however, doing so is not required.

This is separate and apart from the Article 35 requirements for use of deadly force in the case of a burglary, which also does not impose a duty to retreat. I will not go through those because as @Cavalry said don't use that as a reason to shoot someone.

Agree. Discussion which continues. Several judges interpret (no solid case law established) it differently within the state. Due diligence and making sure you speak correctly after the fact becomes paramount. Someone in your dwelling, with means or shown intent of serious injury or death; well within your rights. Someone standing in you living room….

Great discussion! I think it is important especially in NYS.

 

[Brawny71]

Agree. Discussion which continues. Several judges interpret (no solid case law established) it differently within the state. Due diligence and making sure you speak correctly after the fact becomes paramount. Someone in your dwelling, with means or shown intent of serious injury or death; well within your rights. Someone standing in you living room….

Great discussion! I think it is important especially in NYS.

NYS PENAL 35


S 35.05 Justification; generally.
Unless otherwise limited by the ensuing provisions of this article
defining justifiable use of physical force, conduct which would
otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when:
1. Such conduct is required or authorized by law or by a judicial
decree, or is performed by a public servant in the reasonable exercise
of his official powers, duties or functions; or
2. Such conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an
imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a
situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor, and
which is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of
intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding such
injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought
to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue. The
necessity and justifiability of such conduct may not rest upon
considerations pertaining only to the morality and advisability of the
statute, either in its general application or with respect to its
application to a particular class of cases arising thereunder. Whenever
evidence relating to the defense of justification under this subdivision
is offered by the defendant, the court shall rule as a matter of law
whether the claimed facts and circumstances would, if established,
constitute a defense.

 

[spat]

Good luck not getting charged if you shoot someone in an attached garage. Laws matter little in this state.

That depends greatly on what county you live in.

The laws may be identical, but the application varies drastically.

Which is a sign of a failed justice system IMHO.

 

[Brawny71]

This has the dwelling reference as posted above. But note the justification reiterated.


S 35.15 Justification; use of physical force in defense of a person.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she
reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a
third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or
imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:
(a) The latter's conduct was provoked by the actor with intent to
cause physical injury to another person; or
(b) The actor was the initial aggressor; except that in such case the
use of physical force is nevertheless justifiable if the actor has
withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such
withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing
the incident by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical
force; or
(c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by
agreement not specifically authorized by law.
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person
under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or
about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the
actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with
complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no
duty to retreat if he or she is:
(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police
officer or a peace officer at the latter`s direction, acting pursuant to
section 35.30; or
(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal
sexual act or robbery; or
(c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that
the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of
section 35.20.

 

[Saltwater60]

That depends greatly on what county you live in.

The laws may be identical, but the application varies drastically.

Which is a sign of a failed justice system IMHO.

I’d argue almost every county in NYS you’d be charged for shooting someone in your attached garage. I’d also need to see some sort of case law that says an attached garage is considered an occupied dwelling. Here is the property law definition of dwelling. I’m not sure dwelling is defined in article 35. It’s essentially where someone lives and rests their head at night. I get its attached to that but not sure it would hold up to legal scrutiny if spectated by doors.

NYS Open Legislation |

www.nysenate.gov

 

[Brawny71]

Also physical vs. deadly force becomes a whole other mud fight. In the thread example I didn’t hear anything about weapons. Shooting through a closed door also becomes a? And a liability point. Moving to use of deadly force needs a justification. You also have to be cautious not to provoke the confrontation. Not the case in this example, but if you use words to draw somebody onto your property, your justification comes into question very quickly, especially in this state.

 

[spat]

I’d argue almost every county in NYS you’d be charged for shooting someone in your attached garage. I’d also need to see some sort of case law that says an attached garage is considered an occupied dwelling. Here is the property law definition of dwelling. I’m not sure dwelling is defined in article 35. It’s essentially where someone lives and rests their head at night. I get its attached to that but not sure it would hold up to legal scrutiny if spectated by doors.

NYS Open Legislation |

www.nysenate.gov

'"dwelling" shall mean any building or structure or portion thereof...'

House itself is clearly a dwelling. An attached garage is certainly a portion thereof of that structure.

 

[Brawny71]

Justification is spelled out above for dwelling.


S 140.00 Criminal trespass and burglary; definitions of terms.
The following definitions are applicable to this article:
1. "Premises" includes the term "building," as defined herein, and any
real property.
2. "Building," in addition to its ordinary meaning, includes any
structure, vehicle or watercraft used for overnight lodging of persons,
or used by persons for carrying on business therein, or used as an
elementary or secondary school, or an inclosed motor truck, or an
inclosed motor truck trailer. Where a building consists of two or more
units separately secured or occupied, each unit shall be deemed both a
separate building in itself and a part of the main building.
3. "Dwelling" means a building which is usually occupied by a person
lodging therein at night.
4. "Night" means the period between thirty minutes after sunset and
thirty minutes before sunrise.
5. "Enter or remain unlawfully." A person "enters or remains
unlawfully" in or upon premises when he is not licensed or privileged to
do so. A person who, regardless of his intent, enters or remains in or
upon premises which are at the time open to the public does so with
license and privilege unless he defies a lawful order not to enter or
remain, personally communicated to him by the owner of such premises or
other authorized person. A license or privilege to enter or remain in a
building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or
privilege to enter or remain in that part of the building which is not
open to the public. A person who enters or remains upon unimproved and
apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed
in a manner designed to exclude intruders, does so with license and
privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to
him by the owner of such land or other authorized person, or unless such
notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner. A person who enters
or remains in or about a school building without written permission from
someone authorized to issue such permission or without a legitimate
reason which includes a relationship involving custody of or
responsibility for a pupil or student enrolled in the school or without
legitimate business or a purpose relating to the operation of the school
does so without license and privilege.

S 140.05 Trespass.
A person is guilty of trespass when he knowingly enters or remains
unlawfully in or upon premises.
Trespass is a violation.

 

[C3D]

I’d argue almost every county in NYS you’d be charged for shooting someone in your attached garage. I’d also need to see some sort of case law that says an attached garage is considered an occupied dwelling. Here is the property law definition of dwelling. I’m not sure dwelling is defined in article 35. It’s essentially where someone lives and rests their head at night. I get its attached to that but not sure it would hold up to legal scrutiny if spectated by doors.

NYS Open Legislation |

www.nysenate.gov

The key definition for "dwelling" in the context of Article 35 comes from the Court of Appeals in People v. Hernandez, 98 N.Y.2d 175 (2002).

Basically comes down to "a person's residence" and "the determination of whether a particular location is part of a defendant's dwelling depends on the extent to which defendant (and persons actually sharing living quarters with defendant) exercises exclusive possession and control over the area in question. The term encompasses a house, an apartment or a part of a structure where defendant lives and where others are ordinarily excluded the antithesis of which is routine access to or use of an area by strangers."

This should include your attached garage, but you are right there is no case directly on point yet. Which comes back to my earlier point, retreat even if you don't have to. It's cheaper in the long run.

 

[technicalgadget]

Firing into a building sight unseen is a major risk and is reckless, you need to always verify your target. People have shot at shadows and killed their own children or spouses because they did not verify their intended target.

 

[GOPerfect]

The vermin is dead. Great shooting.

If I were on the jury, I would NOT vote to convict.

Shoot all that invade your property.

 

[RedBreast21]

Just FYI, in New York State the castle doctrine extends to your garage but only if it is part of the main house. A separate structure is not part of your castle. A garage attached to the main house that does not have a passage door into the house does in fact count as part of the castle.

Also if you live in an apartment or condo, nothing outside of your apartment (including garages, hallways, elevators) is part of your castle.

Be very careful with that. 99.9% of inside the home garages have locked outside style doors to the main part of the house. Replace it with a screen door and you might get away with that in NY. Might.

 

[SonOfSun]

Know your target and what's behind it. Firing blindly through a door doesn't fit. He failed basic gun safety.