|
SELF DEFENSE – Courvoisier
v. Raymond (1896)
47 P. 284
Author: ERL
P, appellee = Raymond
D, appellant = Courvoisier
Procedural
History: P filed a cause of action for D shooting
him. Trial court ruled in favor of P. D
appealed. Appellate court reversed.
Facts:
D was awakened at night by pounding on the lower level of his
home, which housed his jewelry shop. After he refused to
let the pounding men in, they vandalized the front of his shop
and went around back and gained entry through another way, and
began pounding on D’s sister’s door. D took out
his gun and went to expel the intruders from the building.
When the intruders left the building, they were joined by two or
three others outside the rear of the jewelry store. D fired
a shot to frighten intruders away, but they began to throw stones
and bricks at him. D responded by firing a second and third
shot. Shots had attracted the attention of two sheriffs and
P, a police officer, who came to investigate the disturbance of
the peace. The other two officers stopped and began to
arrest the intruders, and P began towards D. P called out
that he was a police officer and for D to stop shooting. D
took aim and fired, seriously injuring P.
Issues:
Was P assaulting D at the time P was shot? >Yes.
Was the trial court erroneous in its instruction to the
jury that D could only claim self-defense if P was assaulting
him? >Yes.
Holding:
Judgment of the trial court is reversed; D is found to have acted
in reasonable self-defense.
Rationale:
The evidence shows that the circumstances surrounding the
shooting would have led a reasonable man to believe that his life
was in danger, or that he was in danger of great bodily harm at
the hands of the plaintiff. The instruction to the jury did
not allow them to consider whether D would have been justified in
shooting one of the rioters, as he testified he believed P was.
If the jury had been allowed to determine the act excusable for
the mistaken identity, the court believed that they would have
found for the defendant.
|
