Attorney: NY's 'Castle Doctrine' allows homeowners to use deadly force against intruder

[Edwardteach72]

bUt NeW yOrK iS A dUtY To rEtReAt sTatE

Attorney: NY's 'Castle Doctrine' allows homeowners to use deadly force against intruder

The incident has raised questions about what a New York homeowner's legal rights are if an intruder breaks in

longisland.news12.com

 

[Celt]

If youre a regular guy, and an intruder is found with no weapon you can expect to be put through the wringer, take out a second mortgage, and lose your guns while you fight the state in court.. you will get the Rittenhouse treatment by the left.

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6, but make sure youre story is solid.

 

[repete]

some one should tell that to the DA's

 

[dwa12479]

NY is a duty to retreat state, but it doesnt apply in your home or a place you're licensed/privileged to be. So also when I'm at a friends, my sisters, my parents...

 

[FP1201]

What I was told, If you shoot someone (wound or kill) the investigation report WILL go to a Grand Jury for review, now this is scary, but it's also protection for the Person who did the shooting as the Case was examined by a Grand Jury with "no-Bill" means it was found justified and that's pretty well the end of it including legal action later on such as lawsuits.

 

[kev74]

ta too bad that guy’s opinion counts as much as mine does.

 

[GTN]

What I was told, If you shoot someone (wound or kill) the investigation report WILL go to a Grand Jury for review, now this is scary, but it's also protection for the Person who did the shooting as the Case was examined by a Grand Jury with "no-Bill" means it was found justified and that's pretty well the end of it including legal action later on such as lawsuits.

I served on a grand jury and it was very interesting. Especially when the DA wanted a hate crime against someone and we went against that

 

[Phazer]

This is already clear in Article 35. No obligation to retreat in your home.

 

[GOPerfect]

So, this Lawyer says the same thing as many of here have been saying for years.

If the burglar is in your house, good chance he stopped in the kitchen and grabbed a really, really big knife out of the cabinets/

 

[Xae289]

It's important to know where the Castle Doctrine applies (home, hotel, campsite, invited guest at a home, etc), where you have a duty to retreat, and what crimes in progress allow a non-LEO to use deadly force (arson, rape, etc.).

In all honesty, I haven't reviewed the laws recently and should read through them again to refresh my memory.

 

[zorro]

So, this Lawyer says the same thing as many of here have been saying for years.

If the burglar is in your house, good chance he stopped in the kitchen and grabbed a really, really big knife out of the cabinets/

100%……..I leave knives out just to make sure he picks one up

 

[C3D]

NY is a duty to retreat state, but it doesnt apply in your home or a place you're licensed/privileged to be. So also when I'm at a friends, my sisters, my parents...

That's not quite correct. The duty to retreat is only excused (for non-police) if you are in your own "dwelling", as defined in Section 140.00 of the Penal Code, or if you are using deadly physical force to prevent commission of robbery, arson, kidnapping, rape, or, in limited circumstances, a burglary. See Penal Law 35.15(2). The "licensed or privileged to be thereon or therein" applies only in limited circumstances in 35.20 to allow use of deadly force to prevent arson, burglary or attempted burglary of a "dwelling" or "occupied building" (see 140.00) and not to the general use of deadly force in self-defense in other circumstances.

Practical example: Person comes over your sister's house for lawful purposes while you are also visiting. A fight erupts, in which you are not the aggressor, and person pulls knife. Deadly force would be authorized under 35.15 but only if you attempt retreat (which includes ensuring others are safe as well). Deadly force is not justified under 35.20 because no arson, burglary or attempted burglary is being committed.

This is the kind of thing that ends up putting well-meaning honest people in jail.

 

[Cooolone]

If youre a regular guy, and an intruder is found with no weapon you can expect to be put through the wringer, take out a second mortgage, and lose your guns while you fight the state in court.. you will get the Rittenhouse treatment by the left.

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6, but make sure youre story is solid.

Well, when there is ONE story, it's usually solid! Because otherwise the guy was just trying to use the bathroom and it's YOU that'll be IN the shit!

This is already clear un Article 35. No obligation to retreat in your home.

Hahaha, amazingly simple to read! But difficult for many to understand because they keep worrying about and looking for the Big Bad Wolf that never comes!

So, this Lawyer says the same thing as many of here have been saying for years.

If the burglar is in your house, good chance he stopped in the kitchen and grabbed a really, really big knife out of the cabinets/

Lmfao, beat me to it! Many a forensic file has home Intruders clutching a kitchen knife, or it is laying nearby ... Usually with the perpetrators finger prints on it too!





Castle doctrine, stand your ground, SELF DEFENSE... The programming these liberal snowflakes want to imprint in your mind is that it is wrong to do so (defend yourself)... Your privilege should be surrendered upon request! Why resist when someone is just hungry and trying to feed their 8 babies.... And if you had just kept your firearm locked up, unloaded and in a safe, the perpetrator would still be here and out on bail under reform ...

Come on man!

My home is my home, I'm not worrying about justification, not worrying about a grand jury, or whether it's 12 or just one (God) judging me! Heaven forbid the need EVER arise in my home to use deadly physical force, last thing I'm thinking or worrying about is all that bullshit! The one and ONLY thing to worry about is survival, period! Them or you! Make your choice and chose wisely! Just don't hesitate or think about it, because it will be too late!

 

[C3D]

The original article also contains another significant error, it says: "[Brian Griffin, a defense attorney], says the homeowner must have a lawful firearm to use it legally."

An illegal handgun or even machinegun can be used for justifiable self-defense, it's just that you will be charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon.

But what do you expect from a lawyer that shares a name with the dog on Family Guy?

 

[Acer-m14]

remember this .....

Charge dropped against Central NY homeowner who shot, killed 2 intruders

Ronald Stolarcyzk shot two intruders in May who were breaking into his home, police said. He was originally charged with criminal possession of a firearm. That charge was dropped Monday night.

www.syracuse.com

"UTICA, N.Y. -- A homeowner who shot and killed two intruders who police said were burglarizing his home in May has been cleared of any crime, his lawyer said today. "

"Stolarczyk lived in the home with his parents, but they have both died, Wolber said. His dad owned the handgun, and Stolarczyk said he recently discovered it in the home and never registered it himself, he said."

 

[Mk44]

So, this Lawyer says the same thing as many of here have been saying for years.

If the burglar is in your house, good chance he stopped in the kitchen and grabbed a really, really big knife out of the cabinets/

I see what you did.

 

[tirwin1]

No matter how justified you can expect some serious legal bills if you kill someone, particularly in this state. The instructor for one of my classes said if someone was in his house robbing it downstairs he would do nothing. But as soon as the guy took one step on the way upstairs where the family slept then he would shoot. His attitude was the stolen things could all be replaced so why get into the legal hassle unless absolutely necessary. That is a nice hypothetical I suppose but with adrenaline pumping it's not easy to be so logical.

 

[Parzival]

No matter how justified you can expect some serious legal bills if you kill someone, particularly in this state. The instructor for one of my classes said if someone was in his house robbing it downstairs he would do nothing. But as soon as the guy took one step on the way upstairs where the family slept then he would shoot. His attitude was the stolen things could all be replaced so why get into the legal hassle unless absolutely necessary. That is a nice hypothetical I suppose but with adrenaline pumping it's not easy to be so logical.

It’s that kind of passive thinking that gets you killed, find a new instructor.

 

[Parzival]

So, this Lawyer says the same thing as many of here have been saying for years.

If the burglar is in your house, good chance he stopped in the kitchen and grabbed a really, really big knife out of the cabinets/

He doesn’t even need a knife or weapon, your Xbox will do. He can even be running out the door with it.

There was a case in Elmira a while back…two guys, intruder robbed the home owner (most likely a bad drug deal), home owner does some fancy shotgun work and shoots the guy running out…all good no charges filed.

 

[Edwardteach72]

He doesn’t even need a knife or weapon, your Xbox will do. He can even be running out the door with it.

There was a case in Elmira a while back…two guys, intruder robbed the home owner (most likely a bad drug deal), home owner does some fancy shotgun work and shoots the guy running out…all good no charges filed.

I was trying to find that article.. of the Corrections officer who's home had 2 or 3 dudes (I think it was 2 guys ran in and 3rd person, a girlfriend stayed in the car) and turns out the home owner and his son were home..

The home owner was wrestling with one of the intruders when the son went to the bedroom and grabbed a shotgun came back and shot the intruders (one I know for sure was in the leg idk about the other) and not a single charge was filed.

 

[Parzival]

I was trying to find that article.. of the Corrections officer who's home had 2 or 3 dudes (I think it was 2 guys ran in and 3rd person, a girlfriend stayed in the car) and turns out the home owner and his son were home..

The home owner was wrestling with one of the intruders when the son went to the bedroom and grabbed a shotgun came back and shot the intruders (one I know for sure was in the leg idk about the other) and not a single charge was filed.

I was in fear for my life…magic words as we learned in the movie theater case.

 

[Xae289]

I think the reasoning is to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I've also heard a couple of anecdotal accounts of self-defense with a firearm in NY where the person who defended himself wasn't charged with anything. It's not guaranteed, but it's better to be prepared for a legal battle and not get it than to be totally unprepared and find yourself in one.

 

[Phazer]

No matter how justified you can expect some serious legal bills if you kill someone, particularly in this state. The instructor for one of my classes said if someone was in his house robbing it downstairs he would do nothing. But as soon as the guy took one step on the way upstairs where the family slept then he would shoot. His attitude was the stolen things could all be replaced so why get into the legal hassle unless absolutely necessary. That is a nice hypothetical I suppose but with adrenaline pumping it's not easy to be so logical.

It’s that kind of passive thinking that gets you killed, find a new instructor.

Disagree, Parzival.

Defense should be multilayered and planned. If someone has an alarm system that goes off at night when the home is breached downstairs, then the occupants can secure themselves and dependents (kids, pets) upstairs. Knowing that police are on the way to interdict, there is no reason for a non-military, non-LEO, civilian to move into the unknown and try to "clear" their home. No matter how much training you may have, you do not know how many people could be in the dwelling, how many could be awaiting a call to enter, what weapons the invaders have, and whether the invaders will move rapidly to all-out violence if confronted. It is not risking your life for "stuff." It would be a more sound strategy get into a single room with dependents, lock the door, take up defensive positions aiming at the door (hopefully, with multiple defenders taking aim with firearms), and keeping communications open with law enforcement.

Some things I've learned from civilian firearms training: I do not want to have to use my firearms training. I do not want to be shot. I do not want to shoot anyone (though, I most definitely will). There is nothing on the main level of my home for which I'm willing to risk my life. If a bad guy makes their way up to the bedroom before the police arrive, and the bad guy kicks down the bedroom door, the bad guy will be easy for the police to find once they arrive. And...I'll probably have to get a contractor to fix the door, some drywall, and to clean the floor.

 

[Parzival]

Disagree, Parzival.

No thank you. You do you and I’ll do me. Which, in my home, is taking the fight to them.

 

[Phazer]

No thank you. You do you and I’ll do me. Which, in my home, is taking the fight to them.

I can respect that.

I've got my plans based on my skill set. You've got your plans based on your skills.

 

[Blimey]

I think the reasoning is to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I've also heard a couple of anecdotal accounts of self-defense with a firearm in NY where the person who defended himself wasn't charged with anything. It's not guaranteed, but it's better to be prepared for a legal battle and not get it than to be totally unprepared and find yourself in one.

Not just anecdotes. Some years back a guy approached two teens in his driveway ransacking his car. He was rushed by one of them, shot them dead. Went to trial no conviction. In his case he was out of his car but it was justified self-defense.

Common sense applies: retreat if you can, but you don't have to if your life is in danger or that of an innocent third party. Now I think taking a gun out in NY to your car is very stupid, and I am sure the guy in the above case regretted it. If you just walked in your front door and hear some burglar upstairs it's smarter to just walk your ass back outside instead of rushing upstairs to engage the unknown.

 

[Podmonkey]

I didn't know thar NY was a castle doctrine state.
At least that's SOMETHING good.
Nobody should be expected to surrender their own home to an intruder

 

[Phazer]

I didn't know thar NY was a castle doctrine state.
At least that's SOMETHING good.
Nobody should be expected to surrender their own home to an intruder

Article 35 NY Penal Law - Defense of Justification | NY Laws

Justifiable use of physical force, conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when

ypdcrime.com

S 35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and
in defense of a person in the course of burglary.

1. Any person may use physical force upon another person when he or
she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate
what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted
commission by such other person of a crime involving damage to premises.
Such person may use any degree of physical force, other than deadly
physical force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for
such purpose, and may use deadly physical force if he or she reasonably
believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or
attempted commission of arson.

2. A person in possession or control of any premises, or a person
licensed or privileged to be thereon or therein, may use physical force
upon another person when he or she reasonably believes such to be
necessary to prevent or terminate what he or she reasonably believes to
be the commission or attempted commission by such other person of a
criminal trespass upon such premises. Such person may use any degree of
physical force, other than deadly physical force, which he or she
reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose, and may use deadly
physical force in order to prevent or terminate the commission or
attempted commission of arson, as prescribed in subdivision one, or in
the course of a burglary or attempted burglary, as prescribed in
subdivision three.

3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.

4. As used in this section, the following terms have the following
meanings:
(a) The terms "premises," "building" and "dwelling" have the meanings
prescribed in section 140.00;
(b) Persons "licensed or privileged" to be in buildings or upon other
premises include, but are not limited to:
(i) police officers or peace officers acting in the performance of
their duties; and
(ii) security personnel or employees of nuclear powered electric
generating facilities located within the state who are employed as part
of any security plan approved by the federal operating license agencies
acting in the performance of their duties at such generating facilities.
For purposes of this subparagraph, the term "nuclear powered electric
generating facility" shall mean a facility that generates electricity
using nuclear power for sale, directly or indirectly, to the public,
including the land upon which the facility is located and the safety and
security zones as defined under federal regulations.

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.

 

[OwnTheRide]

regular guy, and an intruder is found with no weapon you can expect to be put through the wringer, take out a second mortgage, and lose your guns while you fight the state in court.. you will get the Rittenhouse treatment by the left.

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6, but make sure youre story is solid.

So, this Lawyer says the same thing as many of here have been saying for years.

If the burglar is in your house, good chance he stopped in the kitchen and grabbed a really, really big knife out of the cabinets/

Welp, looks like GOPerfect stole my reply. Every home invader is armed. I repeat: EVERY HOME INVADER IS ARMED.

 

[Phazer]

Welp, looks like GOPerfect stole my reply. Every home invader is armed. I repeat: EVERY HOME INVADER IS ARMED.

If someone breaks into your home, they are not there for cookies.