Objectivity needed

[soonerwings]

Because as soon as you open the door you are no longer in a defensive position, but an aggressive position. Oklahoma's castle doctrine does not extend outside the home. Therefore you have to have an immediate threat to justify deadly force, and someone standing on your porch and banging on the door does not constitute an immediate threat but rather a potential threat. And there is not retreating, you are already behind a closed and (presumably) locked door.



This would be a hard sell. The delivery guy would get on the stand and say he knocked on the door. If thinking that a knock on the door constituted a reasonable belief that someone is trying to break in, there would be several cases of Jehovah Witnesses getting shot through a front door. Since the delivery guy was outside the home, the usual caveats of when you can pull your firearm apply, and quite simply this scenario doesn't have them. Mr. Doe was not in imminent danger (the DG was still outside, door was closed). He could not see if anyone else was in imminent danger. The only thing Mr. Doe has in his defense is he thought someone might be trying to break in. That won't hold in court. Unless it was a Jehovah Witness that is (I kid!).

Who says that opening the door negates being in a defensive position though. 1289.25 allows for the use of force if it is reasonably believed to be necessary to STOP the illegal/forcible entry. To me, that language does bit say that you have to wait for someone to kick in a door and stroll into your home before you can point a firearm.

Also, it should be noted that pointing a firearm is not deadly force, but merely defensive force.

What about Mormons though?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[soonerwings]

I will disagree with this part. Yes, Mr. Doe was not expecting someone, but the delivery guy was expecting someone to be expecting him. I always knock pretty hard on my customer's door, regardless of the time. This is because many times I may knock with what I think is enough force to be heard, and its not. So I exaggerate it to make sure. I also have to knock on doors of people NOT expecting me (when I have to gain entry to their yard to get to a cable ped). I knock with the same force, for the same reason. I also step back about 3 feet from the door so people can see me plainly. So, even though it was dark, its easy to see why the DG would knock loudly.

Did Mr. Doe make a mistake? Yes. Was it his intention to break the law? Probably not. But the fact is he went outside the boundaries set forth by the SDA. As his act was one not done out of malice I don't want him to be charged with anything that will take away his 2nd amendment rights, but he needs to go over the SDA with an instructor and relearn when someone can deploy deadly force.

To be fair, what the pizza guy expected is completely irrelevant. The law allows for justification/excuse if the person using the force had a reasonable belief. It is silent as to what is going through the mind of the “aggressor.”

Did Doe use bad tactical judgment? Probably. That being said, I’m not convinced that he broke the law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[soonerwings]

IMO, he should have never opened the door. He should have yelled out who is there and see if they answered. If no answer, call police and get into a defensive position. If someone does break in, he is free and clear to use deadly force. As soon as he opened the door however, he can not justify deadly force as he walked out of safety and forced the confrontation.

To be fair, he did yell out to ask who was there, but he’s a little hard of hearing. He couldn’t make out what (if anything) was yelled back but the banging continued.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[soonerwings]

I am not an attorney, but I have worked with criminal statutes when I was at the OSBI. With that said, I have to agree that the homeowner negated the break-in aspect simply because he opened the door. In some senses, and a DA could go this route, it was almost like the homeowner was "inviting" the person outside by opening the door.

If there had been an actual shooting, I feel confident that the homeowner would have been charged with murder.

The differences between the misdemeanor and felony statues for "pointing a weapon" is that a misdemeanor occurs when one accidentally points the weapon and a felony when they intentionally point it.

Eh.. I disagree with most of this. I’ve opened my door hundreds of times simply to see who was knocking with NO intention of inviting anyone in.

If there had been an actual shooting, malice/premeditation/felony occurrence would have to be proved to get murder. Manslaughter would be more likely.

The misdemeanor statute doesn’t have much to do with accidental pointing, assuming you’re talking about 1289.11. That particular statute has to do more with conscious disregard of a known risk. I’ve actually beaten that charge for a client before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[donner]

To be fair, what the pizza guy expected is completely irrelevant. The law allows for justification/excuse if the person using the force had a reasonable belief. It is silent as to what is going through the mind of the “aggressor.”

Did Doe use bad tactical judgment? Probably. That being said, I’m not convinced that he broke the law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

out of curiosity, what would have happened if the delivery gun (facing an unexpected gun) had reacted and shot Doe (i've known some delivery drivers to carry)? Would he be guilty or was he acting in self defense, too?

 

[Tanis143]

Who says that opening the door negates being in a defensive position though. 1289.25 allows for the use of force if it is reasonably believed to be necessary to STOP the illegal/forcible entry.

Yes, but again you are looking at if from a biased point of view. What you are seeing as "reasonable" could be totally different than what others see as reasonable. Again, look at what a jury will hear. The DG will state he knocked on the door and this guy opened the door and shoved a gun in his face. Even if Mr. Doe gets on the stand and said it sounded like someone was kicking his door, the jury will have to decide which version is more credible.

Also you have to look at where the DG was at, outside. If an intruder is inside your house there are no restrictions on when you can pull a weapon in self defense. However, him being outside, the front door closed and probably locked, Mr. Doe will have to prove that he had reasonable fear for his life or another's life to pull his firearm. This is dealt with in the SDA. Most of what I've seen the Firearm Act deal with is intruders inside the home.

Your best bet is to do a case lookup and see if there are any cases similar to see how the courts and/or juries decided those cases. We could all sit here and armchair lawyer, but actual case studies would do us all one better.

 

[soonerwings]

out of curiosity, what would have happened if the delivery gun (facing an unexpected gun) had reacted and shot Doe (i've known some delivery drivers to carry)? Would he be guilty or was he acting in self defense, too?

Off the top of my head, without going back and re-reading, I think the pizza guy in this scenario is screwed. If I remember correctly, the statutory language says that anyone who is in any place where they legally allowed to be has the right to stand their ground.

Now, if the pizza guy is at the right house then he’s fine. At that point he’s an invitee.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[donner]

Off the top of my head, without going back and re-reading, I think the pizza guy in this scenario is screwed. If I remember correctly, the statutory language says that anyone who is in any place where they legally allowed to be has the right to stand their ground.

Now, if the pizza guy is at the right house then he’s fine. At that point he’s an invitee.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

but, generally speaking, being on someone's porch to knock on their door isn't illegal until they ask you to leave and you refuse, right? Simply being there (especially if it was a 'honest mistake' isn't immediately illegal, is it?).

And if we are talking about reacting to 'perceived threats' then having a gun pulled on you would seem to be a pretty justifiable one.

 

[soonerwings]

Yes, but again you are looking at if from a biased point of view. What you are seeing as "reasonable" could be totally different than what others see as reasonable. Again, look at what a jury will hear. The DG will state he knocked on the door and this guy opened the door and shoved a gun in his face. Even if Mr. Doe gets on the stand and said it sounded like someone was kicking his door, the jury will have to decide which version is more credible.

Also you have to look at where the DG was at, outside. If an intruder is inside your house there are no restrictions on when you can pull a weapon in self defense. However, him being outside, the front door closed and probably locked, Mr. Doe will have to prove that he had reasonable fear for his life or another's life to pull his firearm. This is dealt with in the SDA. Most of what I've seen the Firearm Act deal with is intruders inside the home.

Your best bet is to do a case lookup and see if there are any cases similar to see how the courts and/or juries decided those cases. We could all sit here and armchair lawyer, but actual case studies would do us all one better.

Agreed on the battle of credibility, and the pizza guy has some serious credibility problems in his past to impeach him with. I’m not going into specifics on those, but I can destroy his credibility if it comes down to two competing stories. That’s my “hole card” if you will.

Here’s the other one: I don’t have to prove that Mr. Doe acted had a reasonable belief. The State has to prove that he didn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[soonerwings]

Yes, but again you are looking at if from a biased point of view. What you are seeing as "reasonable" could be totally different than what others see as reasonable. Again, look at what a jury will hear. The DG will state he knocked on the door and this guy opened the door and shoved a gun in his face. Even if Mr. Doe gets on the stand and said it sounded like someone was kicking his door, the jury will have to decide which version is more credible.

Also you have to look at where the DG was at, outside. If an intruder is inside your house there are no restrictions on when you can pull a weapon in self defense. However, him being outside, the front door closed and probably locked, Mr. Doe will have to prove that he had reasonable fear for his life or another's life to pull his firearm. This is dealt with in the SDA. Most of what I've seen the Firearm Act deal with is intruders inside the home.

Your best bet is to do a case lookup and see if there are any cases similar to see how the courts and/or juries decided those cases. We could all sit here and armchair lawyer, but actual case studies would do us all one better.

Also, you’d be surprised at how few cases there are applying current law to similar fact patterns. I’ve been looking. I’ve also been looking for case law regarding a procedural attack that I plan on making. It’s been an intensive study session for the past day or two.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk