MO 406.18 JUSTIFICATION: USE OF FORCE TO PREVENT ESCAPE FROM CONFINEMENT
Missouri Approved Instructions–Criminal (MAI-CR) 4th
406.18 JUSTIFICATION: USE OF FORCE TO PREVENT ESCAPE FROM CONFINEMENT
PART A – GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
One of the issues (as to Count _____) (in this case) is whether the use of force by the defendant against [name of victim] was the lawful use of force by a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) to prevent escape from confinement. In this state, the use of force (including the use of deadly force) by a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) in preventing escape from confinement is lawful in certain situations.
[Use the material in [1] in ALL cases. Omit brackets and number.]
[1] A (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) can lawfully use force to prevent the escape of a person from confinement if he reasonably believes the person is attempting to escape (from confinement) (or) (while being taken to or from a place of confinement). If he has such a belief, he is permitted to use that amount of force which he reasonably believes to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape.
[Use the material in [2] ONLY if there is evidence the defendant used deadly force. Omit brackets and number.]
[2] But in preventing escape from confinement a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) is not entitled to use deadly force, that is, force which he knows will create a substantial risk of causing death or serious physical injury, unless he reasonably believes that there is a substantial risk that the person attempting to escape will endanger human life or cause serious physical injury unless the escape is prevented.
And, even then, a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) may use deadly force only if he reasonably believes the use of such force is immediately necessary to prevent the escape.
[Use the material in [3] in ALL cases. Omit brackets and number.]
[3] As used in this instruction, the term “reasonable belief” means a belief based on reasonable grounds, that is, grounds which could lead a reasonable person in the same situation to the same belief. This depends upon how the facts reasonably appeared. It does not depend upon whether the belief turned out to be true or false.
PART B – SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS
On the issue of use of force by a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) (as to Count _____) (in this case), you are instructed as follows:
[1] [Insert either [A], [B], [C], or [D] as appropriate. Omit brackets and material within the brackets.]
[A] [Use the following when there is no evidence as to the use of deadly force.]
If the defendant was a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) and reasonably believed that [name of victim] was attempting to escape (from confinement) (or) (while being taken to or from a place of confinement) and used only such force as reasonably appeared to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape, then his use of force was lawful.
[B] [Use the following when the evidence is clear that deadly force was used by the defendant and there is no dispute as to that issue.]
If the defendant was a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) and reasonably believed that [name of victim] was attempting to escape (from confinement) (or) (while being taken to or from a place of confinement), and he reasonably believed that there was a substantial risk that [name of victim] would endanger human life or cause serious physical injury unless the escape was prevented, and he reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary to prevent the escape of [name of victim], then he acted lawfully in preventing an escape.
[C] [Use the following when there is some evidence that the defendant used deadly force and it is an issue in the case whether the defendant used deadly force but there is no evidence supporting the lawful use of deadly force.]
If the defendant was a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) and reasonably believed that [name of victim] was attempting to escape (from confinement) (or) (while being taken to or from a place of confinement) and used only such non-deadly force as reasonably appeared to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape, then his use of force was lawful.
[D] [Use the following when there is some evidence that the defendant used deadly force and it is an issue in the case whether the defendant used deadly force, and there is also evidence supporting the lawful use of deadly force.]
If the defendant was a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) and reasonably believed that [name of victim] was attempting to escape (from confinement) (or) (while being taken to or from a place of confinement) and used only such non-deadly force as reasonably appeared to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape, then his use of force was lawful, or
if the defendant reasonably believed that there was a substantial risk that [name of victim] would endanger human life or cause serious physical injury unless the escape was prevented, and he reasonably believed that the use of deadly force was immediately necessary to prevent the escape of [name of victim], then his use of deadly force was lawful.
[2] [This paragraph must be used in ALL cases.]
The state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entitled to use force as a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) to prevent an escape from confinement. Unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entitled to use force as a (guard) (or) (law enforcement officer) to prevent an escape from confinement, you must find the defendant not guilty (under Count _____).
[3] [If the term “serious physical injury” is used in this instruction, then the following paragraph defining that term must be used.]
As used in this instruction, the term “serious physical injury” means physical injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes serious disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any part of the body.
(v. 7-1-17)