Homeowner shoots man breaking into his shed

[RPBrown]

I have some issues with this story:
1) What does it matter if he had a CHL? It was his property

Now for the bad part of this.
2) I dont think this was a good shoot. The BG was not armed and not breaking into the guys house. I thought it had to be your house or, if after dark, your vehicle.
3) The BG had jumped the fence and was running away when the home owner shot. Does this mean he shot through a fence? If so, I hope it was not a wood or some other solid type of fence.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Homeow ... B_DFWBrand" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[MotherBear]

A lot of times when I see neighborhoods that have alleys, the fences are short picket fences or something similar. Especially if the burglar was able to jump it (rather than climb it, although that could be sloppy reporting), it would seem likely it was a shorter fence and the homeowner was probably shooting over it rather than through it. Just a guess, without a more detailed location or other description.

[baldeagle]

I have some issues with this story:
1) What does it matter if he had a CHL? It was his property

Now for the bad part of this.
2) I dont think this was a good shoot. The BG was not armed and not breaking into the guys house. I thought it had to be your house or, if after dark, your vehicle.

At nighttime you can shoot a thief, even if they are trying to escape. However, this sounds like a burglary, so he could shoot him 24/7. This seems to be a common misperception on this board. It is perfectly legal to shoot someone who is trying to escape after attempting to steal property.

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Sec. 30.02. BURGLARY. (a) A person commits an offense if, without the effective consent of the owner, the person:

(1) enters a habitation, or a building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with intent to commit a felony, theft, or an assault;

[RoyGBiv]

^^^ Thanks for saving me the time quoting 9.42.... again.

[jsk]

The only thing that makes this not quite so clear-cut to me is that 9.41(1)(b) says you can prevent them from "escaping with the property". If the burglar is fleeing without any stolen property, is that covered by 9.41(1)(a) or 9.41(1)(b)? Under section (b), it doesn't seem like it would be a justified shoot if they've left behind whatever they were attempting to steal.

[Wes]

I'm curious what the requirement for knowing if they have something is. I mean, they 'could' have something in their pockets. Does seem to me that you'd have to know but I wonder how that is actually judged.

[suthdj]

I'm curious what the requirement for knowing if they have something is. I mean, they 'could' have something in their pockets. Does seem to me that you'd have to know but I wonder how that is actually judged.

Probably by a grand jury, unless you inventory his pockets before you shoot him.

[rbwhatever1]

Looks like this guy finally learned a valuable lesson. Maybe his buddies will stop stealing other peoples labor, because that's all we have in our finite existence on this planet. Our labor allows us to acquire those things we will need as we age, and those things we need to make our time on this planet enjoyable. One stores his labor during that part of life when he is able to work. Those who steal our property, turns us into slaves.

And now the good news....

A homeowner who shot a burglar multiple times Monday in Far East Dallas won’t face criminal charges, police said.

Festus Johnson, 34, who was taken to Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas, will face a burglary of a building charge, police said. Johnson, who has previously been convicted on burglary charges in Dallas County, is accused of breaking into the homeowner’s backyard storage shed in the 2700 block of Blyth Drive.

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/06 ... home.html/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[C-dub]

In my younger days I could and have hoped a 6' wood fence by jumping up, putting my hands on top, and swinging my legs over without touching the fence.

[XDgal]

WFAA ch. 8 news did a story on this evening's 10:00 p.m. broadcast. Showed the fence, and it was a six foot wood fence. Showed a bullit hole in said fence, too. Mentioned the home owner won't face charges, but the bugular would. They also said the home owner's HOA was very upset with him firing his gun.

[MotherBear]

In my younger days I could and have hoped a 6' wood fence by jumping up, putting my hands on top, and swinging my legs over without touching the fence.

You're a better man than I. But that's probably just as well, since I'm not.

On Google maps it looks like a fair bit of that street has 4' chain link fence, but sounds like in this case he actually did shoot through a 6' privacy fence. So much for my guesswork!

[RPBrown]

WFAA ch. 8 news did a story on this evening's 10:00 p.m. broadcast. Showed the fence, and it was a six foot wood fence. Showed a bullit hole in said fence, too. Mentioned the home owner won't face charges, but the bugular would. They also said the home owner's HOA was very upset with him firing his gun.

Thus the reason for my problem. Don't get me wrong, I am glad he got him. The issue I am having is he apparantly was shooting at him thru the wooden fence. This leaves a lot of guesswork as to target acquisition. There are many ways this could have gone wrong for the home owner.

As for the HOA being upset, TOO BAD. GET OVER IT.

To those that posted the law about the storage building, Thank you.

[Keith B]

The only thing that makes this not quite so clear-cut to me is that 9.41(1)(b) says you can prevent them from "escaping with the property". If the burglar is fleeing without any stolen property, is that covered by 9.41(1)(a) or 9.41(1)(b)? Under section (b), it doesn't seem like it would be a justified shoot if they've left behind whatever they were attempting to steal.

9.42 clearly lists prevention of burglary as a justification to use deadly force. Breaking into a shed on your property is burglary.

[Wes]

But it also says it can't be protected in any other way, so if he is fleeing with no stolen property what is there to protect or prevent? Is it one of those where you are stopping the eminent theft of other property? Or is it just back to reasonable doubt that he has stolen something and since you can't know what how can you determine if it can be recovered by other means? Any other cases similar y'all know of which may have more detail?

[RoyGBiv]

it is "reasonable", IN MY OPINION, to believe that after watching a burglar drop several heavy clumsy stolen items before fleeing, that he very likely had other items in his possession that were not dropped. If I'm on the Grand Jury, it would not be asking too much of me to see that as "reasonable".

Emphasis mine...

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.