The couple happened upon Halterman's building as they were walking along Paradise Trail on the way to explore the remains of Penn Hills Resort. Frailey said that they assumed the structure, which was surrounded by garbage and debris, to be abandoned. Schultz initially called out to ask if anyone was inside the building, and when they received no response, the pair entered and explored for about 20 to 25 minutes. When Frailey joined Schultz on a second floor catwalk to look around further, she pointed a flashlight toward a wall and saw a firearm emerge from behind a covering.
Two shots were fired, and Frailey reported that she felt a "pinch" in her abdomen. Schultz pushed her along the catwalk to escape as several more shots were fired. Frailey said that she collapsed at the bottom of the staircase, with Schultz landing on top of her legs, pinning her. And he fell face-down on the stairs and the guy shot him again.
Sometimes, like in the Halterman case, the answers were readily apparent ," Mancuso said. In a preliminary hearing for the Halterman case held in March , Magisterial District Judge Michael Muth also noted that the Castle Doctrine would likely not stand as a defense, playing into his decision to maintain the charge of homicide over self-defense.
More: Preliminary hearing reveals details in fatal Stroud Twp. In June , a Cambria County woman fatally shot year-old Thomas Deal, who broke into her home, though in this case, District Attorney Greg Neugebauer stated that his office treated the incident as a justified use of force.
At that point, she discharged her weapon. Cambria County Coroner Jeff Lees said that Deal was within six feet of the homeowner when she fired her gun, providing evidence that he was relatively close to her by the time she used the weapon. Neugebauer noted that those details indicated the homeowner had a reasonable fear of being harmed or even killed, and thus was justified in using deadly force to stop him.
The Cambria County homeowner issued clear warnings to Deal before firing, and in ignoring those warnings, It can be inferred that she was in fear for her life, or the lives and safety of her family members.
Kresge's attorney argued that his client acted in self-defense. Kresge was a felon not to possess a weapon, a firearm. The firm serves the Pocono area. At the moment, it is unknown if Halterman's attorney or attorneys will attempt to claim self-defense or the Castle Doctrine during trial, though it is possible. Some criminal defense attorneys might employ such a strategy, while others would pursue a different approach.
Ventrella referenced the Halterman case as a clear example of a case in which the Castle Doctrine does not necessarily apply, noting that the circumstances of the event exclude it from a situation in which a district attorney would apply it. According to Ventrella, in the Halterman instance, it appears that he was attempting to defend his property, and not himself.
When it comes to strategizing for a trial defense, reasonable application of deadly force is a key issue, and requires careful consideration for each unique situation. Mancuso recommends that firearm owners be informed of any and all laws pertaining to the use of their weapons. Seminars and symposiums that are intended to educate gun owners are hosted frequently across the country, and can provide invaluable information that may save lives, he said. Since education is integral to responsible ownership, most experts encourage those who have or are interested in purchasing firearms to keep abreast of important laws and regulations.
The Pennsylvania State Police offer information freely through their website , including safety videos, firearm forms, and other educational materials for owners to keep up to date with rules and regulations. In other words, you were fully aware the act of self-defense was planned in advance.
You did what you had to do what you needed to do to protect yourself from bodily harm. According to PA law, conduct that is typically labeled as criminal is not defined as illegal, if the act in question was justified. Capalla, Pa. Here are four threat scenarios that justify the use of force in self-defense cases under Pennsylvania law:. You typically cannot claim self-defense for a case when you had the chance to avoid a possible threat by retreating from the pursuer.
However, the legal obligation to retreat is null and void in situations that are covered by Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground cases. In Pennsylvania, you are not legally required to perform the following acts before using deadly force in a self-defense case:.
Self-defense in Pennsylvania must be necessary and proportional. The use of deadly force can be used if a threat is about to happen. For example, can you use deadly force against someone that threatens to rob you?
The answer to that question is often left up to judges and juries, which is one reason why it is essential to consult with an experienced Pennsylvania attorney that has amassed years of litigating self-defense cases. Self-defense must also be reasonable given the circumstances of an imminent threat.
This is another reason to have the right legal counsel by your side in a self-defense case. If you are considered a law-abiding gun owner LAGO under Pennsylvania law, you will most likely use a firearm only to defend yourself, not actively commit violence against another person.
You should understand that if you are a LAGO, speaking with a law enforcement official, while you under incredible distress, can eliminate any effective defense implemented by an accomplished self-defense law attorney.
0コメント