HI 7.02A. Defense Of Others When Deadly Force Is At Issue.

HI 7.02A. Defense Of Others When Deadly Force Is At Issue.

State: Hawaii

 

HAWAI’I JURY INSTRUCTIONS (HAWJIC)

HI 7.02A.  Defense Of Others When Deadly Force Is At Issue.

Section 1 – Defense; Issues; Burden of Proof 

Defense of others is a defense to the charge(s) of (specify charge and its included offenses).  Defense of others involves  consideration  of two  issues.  First,  you  must

determine whether the defendant did or did not use “deadly force.”  Second, you must determine whether the force used was justifiable. The burden is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the force used by the defendant was not justifiable.

If the prosecution does not meet its burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty.

Section 2 – First Issue; Definitions

The first issue is:  Did the defendant use “deadly force?”

“Deadly Force” means force which the defendant uses with the intent of causing, or which he/she knows to create a substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury.

“Force” means any bodily impact, restraint, or confinement, or the threat thereof.

[“Serious bodily injury” means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.]

[Intentionally firing a firearm in the direction of another person orin the direction which the person is believed to be constitutes deadly force.]

[A threat to cause death or serious bodily injury, by the production of a weapon or otherwise, so long as the actor’s intent is limited to creating an apprehension that he/she will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute deadly force.]

Section 3 – Transition to Second Issue  

If you determine that the defendant used “deadly force,” then you are to proceed to the section in this instruction entitled “Deadly Force Used.”  If you determine that the defendant did  not use  “deadly  force,”  then  you are  to  proceed  to  the section in  this instruction  entitled  “Deadly  Force  Not  Used.”  You  must then follow  the law in  the applicable section to determine the second issue, which is whether the force used by the defendant was justifiable.

“Deadly Force” Used

Section 4 – When Deadly Force is Justifiable

The use of deadly force upon or toward another person is justifiable to protect a third person if, under the circumstances as the defendant reasonably believes them to be, the third person would be justified in using deadly force to protect himself/herself on the present occasion against [death] [serious bodily injury] [kidnapping] [rape] [forcible sodomy] and the defendant reasonably believes that his/her intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.  The reasonableness of the defendant’s belief that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary shall be determined  from  the viewpoint of a reasonable  person  in  the defendant’s  position  under  the circumstances  of which  the defendant was aware or as the defendant reasonably believed them to be when the deadly force was used.  [The defendant’s belief that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary may be mistaken, but reasonable.]

Section 5 – When Deadly Force is Not Justifiable:  Third Person Provoked Use of Force

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant reasonably believes that the third person, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself/herself in the same encounter.]

Section 6 – When Deadly Force is Not Justifiable: Defendant’s Duty to Retreat, Surrender Possession, or Comply with Demand 

(The next three paragraphs concern the defendant’s general duty to retreat and its two exceptions.)

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant knows that, by retreating, he/she can:

(1) avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety; and

(2) secure the complete safety of the third person.]

[The defendant is not required to retreat from [his/her own] [the third person’s] dwelling  unless  he/she  was  the initial  aggressor.  “Dwelling”  means  any  building  or structure, though movable or temporary, or a portion thereof, which is for the time being a home or place of lodging.]

[The defendant is not required to retreat from [his/her own] [the third person’s] place of work  unless  he/she was  [the initial  aggressor]  [assailed  in  [his/her  own]  [the third person’s] place of work by another person whose place of work the defendant knows it to be].

(The next three paragraphs concern situations in which the defendant would be obligated to retreat while in his/her or the third person’s dwelling or place of work.)

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant is the initial aggressor in [his/her own] [the third person’s] dwelling and knows that, by retreating, he/she can:

(1) avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety; and

(2) secure the complete safety of the third person.

“Dwelling” means any building or structure, though movable or temporary, or a portion thereof, which is for the time being a home or place of lodging.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant is the initial aggressor in [his/her own] [the third person’s] place of work and knows that, by retreating, he/she can:

(1) avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety; and

(2) secure the complete safety of the third person.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant is assailed in [his/her own] [the third person’s] place of work by another person whose place of work the defendant knows it to be and the defendant knows that, by retreating, he/she can:

(1) avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety; and

(2) secure the complete safety of the third person.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant knows that, by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto he/she can:

(1)  avoid  the necessity of using  such  force  with  complete safety;  and

(2)  secure the complete safety of the third person.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant knows that, by complying with a demand that he/she abstain from any action which he/she has no duty to take, he/she can:

(1) avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety; and

(2) secure the complete safety of the third person.]

(The  next paragraph  states  an  exception  that may  be  applicable  under  the  circumstances described in either of the preceding two paragraphs.)

[If the defendant is a [public officer justified in using force in the performance of his/her duties or a person justified in using force in his/her assistance] [person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape] he/she is not obliged to desist from efforts to [perform  his/her  duty]  [effect  the arrest  or  prevent  the escape]  because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom the action is directed.]

Section 7 – When Deadly Force is Not Justifiable:  Third Person’s Duty to Retreat, Surrender Possession, or Comply with Demand

(The  next three paragraphs  concern  the third  person’s general  duty  to retreat and its  two exceptions.)

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the third person knows  that  he/she  can avoid the necessity of using  such  force  with  complete safety  by retreating, the defendant knows that he/she can obtain the third person’s complete safety by causing the third person to retreat, and the defendant does not try to cause the third person to retreat.]

[The third person is not required to retreat from [his/her own] [the defendant’s] dwelling unless he/she was the initial aggressor.  “Dwelling” means any building or structure, though movable or temporary, or a portion thereof, which is for the time being a home or place of lodging.]

[The third person is not required to retreat from [his/her own] [the defendant’s] place of work unless he/she was [the initial aggressor] [assailed in [his/her own] [the defendant’s] place of work by another person whose place of work the defendant knows it to be].

(The next three paragraphs concern situations in which the third person would be obligated to retreat while in his/her or the defendant’s dwelling or place of work.)

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the third person is the initial aggressor in [his/her own] [the defendant’s] dwelling and knows that he/she can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating, the defendant knows that he/she can obtain the third person’s complete safety by causing the third person to retreat, and the defendant does not try to cause the third person to retreat.  “Dwelling” means any building or structure, though movable or temporary, or a portion thereof, which is for the time being a home or place of lodging.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the third person is the initial aggressor in [his/her own] [the defendant’s] place of work and knows that he/she can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating, the defendant knows that he/she can obtain the third person’s complete safety by causing the third person to retreat, and the defendant does not try to cause the third person to retreat.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the third person is assailed in [his/her own] [the defendant’s] place of work by another person whose place of work the third person knows it to be and the third person knows that he/she can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating, the defendant knows that he/she can obtain  the third  person’s  complete safety  by  causing  the third  person  to  retreat,  and the defendant does not try to cause the third person to retreat.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the third person knows  that he/she  can  avoid  the necessity of using  such  force  with  complete safety  by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto, the defendant knows that he/she can obtain the third person’s complete safety by causing the third person to do so, and the defendant does not try to cause the third person to do so.]

[The use of deadly force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the third person knows  that  he/she  can avoid the necessity of using  such  force  with  complete safety  by complying with a demand that he/she abstain from any action which he/she has no duty to take, the defendant knows that he/she can obtain the third person’s complete safety by causing the third person to do so, and the defendant does not try to cause the third person to do so.]

(The  next paragraph  states  an  exception  that may  be  applicable  under  the circumstances described in either of the preceding two paragraphs.)

[If the third person is a [public officer justified in using force in the performance of his/her duties or a person justified in using force in his/her assistance] [person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape] he/she is not obliged to desist from efforts to [perform  his/her  duty]  [effect  the arrest  or  prevent  the escape]  because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom the action is directed.]

“Deadly Force” Not Used

Section 8 – When Force is Justifiable

The use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable to protect a third person if, under the circumstances as the defendant reasonably believes them to be, the third person would be justified in using force to protect himself/herself on the present occasion against the use of unlawful force by the other person and the defendant reasonably believes that his/her intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.  The reasonableness of the defendant’s belief that the use of force was immediately necessary shall be determined from the viewpoint of a reasonable person in the defendant’s position under the circumstances of which the defendant was aware or as the defendant reasonably believed them to be. The defendant may estimate the necessity for the use of force under the circumstances as he/she reasonably believes them to be when the force is used, without [retreating] [surrendering possession] [doing any other act that he/she has no legal duty to do] [abstaining from any lawful action].  [The defendant’s belief that the use of force was immediately necessary may be mistaken, but reasonable.]

Section 9 – When Force is Not Justifiable:  Third Person Resisting Arrest or Force Used Under Claim of Right

[The use of force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant reasonably believes that the third person is resisting an arrest the third person knows is being made by a law enforcement officer,  even  if the arrest is unlawful,  but is  justifiable  if the defendant reasonably believes that the officer is threatening to use or using unlawful force.]

[The use of force to protect a third person is not justifiable if the defendant reasonably believes that the third person is resisting force used by the occupier or possessor of property or by another person on his/her behalf, where the third person knows that the person using force is doing so under a claim of right to protect the property, but is justifiable if the defendant reasonably believes that the third person [is a public officer acting in the performance of his/her duties or a person lawfully assisting him/her therein] [is a person making or assisting in a lawful arrest] [believes that such force is necessary to protect himself/herself against death or serious bodily injury.]

Section 10 – Confinement

[The use of confinement as force to protect a third person is justifiable only if the defendant takes all reasonable measures to terminate the confinement as soon as he/she knows that he/she safely can, unless the person confined has been arrested on a charge of crime.]

Section 11 – Definitions

“Force” means any bodily impact, restraint, or confinement, or the threat thereof.

“Unlawful force” means force which is used without the consent of the person against whom it is directed and the use of which would constitute an unjustifiable use of deadly force or force. A person cannot consent to the infliction of death, serious bodily injury, or substantial bodily injury.

“Serious bodily injury” means bodily injury which creates a substantialrisk of death or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.

“Substantial bodily injury” means bodily injury which causes: [A major avulsion, laceration, or penetration of the skin] [a burn of at least second degree severity] [a bone fracture] [a serious concussion] [a tearing, rupture, or corrosive damage to the esophagus, viscera, or other internal organs].

“Bodily injury” means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.

Section 12 – Defense Not Available

[Defense of others is not available for the offense(s) of (specify any offense in which the requisite state of mind is either recklessness or negligence) if the prosecution proves that:

(1) the defendant was reckless in believing that he/she was justified in using deadly force or force to protect a third person against another person; or

(2) the defendant was reckless in acquiring or failing to acquire any knowledge or belief

 which was material to the justifiability of his/her use of deadly force or force to protect a third person against another person.]

By | 2013-01-14T20:24:37+00:00 January 14th, 2013|Comments Off on HI 7.02A. Defense Of Others When Deadly Force Is At Issue.