Stand Your Ground: New Challenges for Forensic Psychologists, Part Two

Evolving from English Common Law, the Castle Doctrine has expanded to the Stand Your Ground Doctrine, providing immunity from prosecution for Floridians defending themselves, including by the use of deadly force, from presumed criminal attack. The new law places the onus with law enforcers for evaluating the nexus between reasonable fear and deadly force. Forensic scientists are challenged to provide assessment tools proven to be germane, definitive, and quantifiable to assist law enforcers with the accurate determination of authentic and reasonable fear. From the Fall 2006 Forensic Examiner; written by Patricia Wallace, PhD.

In the language of Senate Bill 436, the term reasonable force is substituted for deadly force, thereby signifying the construction of righteous, justifiable, and excusable homicide. While self-defense is defined as “the right of a person to defend against any unlawful force or any seriously threatened unlawful force that is pending or may be reasonably anticipated,” in most courts it is held that the force used by the defender must not exceed the force used by the attacker.

Most state laws have an implicit expectation that reasonable fear can be met with equally reasonable force. However, any force that exceeds the minimum amount of force reasonably necessary to defend against an assailant could possibly result in the authorities arresting and charging the defender with a crime. In fact, in most cases, the responding law enforcement officers give vast latitude in assessing defenders’ use of reasonable force.

In Florida, law enforcement agencies are given ultimate responsibility to determine whether the actions of the defender constitute reasonable or excessive force. The final determination of whether a case will be adjudicated rests with the law enforcement agency. Therefore, it is important to understand how the law enforcement agency defines and measures the construct of reasonable fear and correlates it with reasonable force, including deadly force.

The operative part of the law, codified in chapter 776 of the Florida Statutes and consistent with the Castle Doctrine principle, begins by setting forth the standard for use of deadly force against an attack in one’s home or automobile:

Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.--

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. (2005)

in the law. Those conditions dictate that a citizen is not permitted to use deadly force against someone who has a right to be in the home or vehicle (unless the person is the subject of a domestic violence restraining order or a no-contact order). The right does not apply in child-custody dispute issues. Nor does it apply if the person trying to enter the home or automobile is an identified police officer acting within the scope of police duties.