Revised Arizona Jury Instruction (RAJI 3d)
AZ RAJI3d 4.02 − Justification Defense in Execution of Public Duty
A defendant is justified in using or threatening physical force or deadly physical force if:
1. It was required or authorized by law; or
2. A reasonable person in a similar situation would believe that it was required or authorized [by the judgment or direction of a competent court or tribunal, even though the court or tribunal may have lacked jurisdiction] [in the lawful execution of legal process, even though there may have been a defect in the legal process]; or
3. A reasonable person in a similar situation would believe that it was required or authorized to assist a peace officer in the performance of such officer’s duties, even though the officer may have exceeded the officer’s legal authority.
A defendant may use deadly physical force in execution of public duty only to protect against another’s use or apparent attempted or threatened use of deadly physical force.
Defense in execution of public duty justifies the use or threat of physical force or deadly physical force only while the apparent danger continues, and it ends when the apparent danger ends. The force used may not be greater than reasonably necessary to defend against the apparent danger.
The use of physical force or deadly physical force is justified if a reasonable person in the situation would have reasonably believed that immediate physical danger appeared to be present. Actual danger is not necessary to justify the use of physical force or deadly physical force in defense of execution of public duty.
You must measure the defendant’s belief against what a reasonable person in the situation would have believed.
The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act with such justification. If the State fails to carry this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty of the charge. [The user is directed to the Prefatory Use Note regarding the applicability of this paragraph.]