notalawyer
Regular Member
I would appreciate that. The appellate case is the only thing on which I am able to based an opinion.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
"Firing a warning shot at an attacker legal in Florida"
- Thread starter Arma1911
- Start date
I would appreciate that. The appellate case is the only thing on which I am able to based an opinion.
Working on another issue tonight. Will post tomorrow.
i feel like i'm taking crazy pills reading these comments.
a person can't "fire a warning shot" just because, now.
what a person CAN do, is use the "threat" of lethal force instead of "actual" lethal force when they believe lethal force is necessary, and not face an assault charge.
but i mean, correct me if i'm wrong.
a person can't "fire a warning shot" just because, now.
what a person CAN do, is use the "threat" of lethal force instead of "actual" lethal force when they believe lethal force is necessary, and not face an assault charge.
but i mean, correct me if i'm wrong.
notalawyer
Regular Member
notalawyer
Regular Member
A brief summary would read: The law, which is not really necessary, due to existing case law, might help clear up the fouled up self defense jury instructions, which were already under review by the Florida Supreme Court. :uhoh:
Yeah, you missed a few important provisions. Try reading the bill again. http://laws.flrules.org/2014/195
Last edited:
davidmcbeth
Banned
But if you think lethal force is needed, why not use it.
But your premise is correct ... ya cannot shoot a warning shot because you think someone might be threatening you soon.
Last edited:
Please get your facts correct. She never left the house. Under Florida law the garage is the house. She went from one room in the house to another.
davidmcbeth
Banned
http://www.thenation.com/blog/17864...years-prison-firing-warning-shot-self-defense
Florida State Attorney Angela Corey will seek to triple Marissa Alexander’s original prison sentence from twenty to sixty years, effectively a life sentence for the 33-year-old woman, when her case is retried this July, The Florida Times-Union reports.....
In September of 2013 a District Appeals court threw out the conviction on grounds that Circuit Judge James Daniel erroneously placed the burden on Alexander to prove she acted in self-defense, when she only had to meet a “reasonable doubt concerning self-defense.”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...-Years-Against-Marissa-Alexander-In-2nd-Trail
In September of 2013, her original trial was overturned on grounds that the court placed an undue burden of proof on Alexander, who was acting in self-defense. Prosecuting attorney, Angela Corey could have dropped the case then, but refused to back down. Ironically, Corey was the prosecuting attorney in the Zimmerman trial and was said to have been rather smug over the attention and press she received. Though Alexander's new trial was set for the following March, it wasn't until Thanksgiving before Marisssa Alexander was finally allowed to go home on house arrest to be with her children while awaiting her second trial, now scheduled for July 2014.....
THE SELF-DEFENSE CLAIM
Alexander has claimed she fired a warning shot at her estranged husband, Rico Gray, and wasn’t trying to hit Gray or his two children from a previous relationship. She has said the incident, which happened days after she’d given birth, began when Gray accused her of infidelity and questioned whether the newborn child was his.
Alexander told him to leave and locked herself in the bathroom until he broke through the door, grabbed her by the neck and shoved her to the floor.
She ran into the garage but found she couldn’t leave because the garage door wouldn’t open, according to the report.
She got a gun from the glove compartment of a car in the garage, went back into the house and when Gray saw her, she said he charged, saying he was going to kill her. Alexander fired the gun.
Looks like that lady has a second trial to start next month.... self defense was a viable defense (looks like an affirmative defense in Florida~folks can correct me if I'm wrong).
The case, again, will hinge on the jury believing her or not. That's a problem with a self defense case - you almost always have to admit you committed the act because I think as an alternate defense most jurists are not that sophisticated to understand the concept of an alternate self defense claim.
Did she feel her life was in danger? I don't know...but the garage working when the cops came (about 6-7min of the 2nd vid link below)
Video of her talking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDUIqZN3SgY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDqM6I9rrUA decent video looking at trial info (starts about 2 min in)
UPDATED: I now think that she's guilty ... the DA will now look to get 60 yrs (20 yrs per victim I think)...she turned down a 3 yr plea deal (out in 2 yrs or less) initially ....
Last edited:
Maverick9
Regular Member
I think she's guilty as charged. Yes, it's sad her husband testified against her, but she went 'evil' as a result of his bullying and broke the law, endangered her kids, lied, and deserves some penalty.
Evil or snapped? Not sure it makes a different to the 'ler'.
Evil or snapped? Not sure it makes a different to the 'ler'.
notalawyer
Regular Member
Nope, haven't missed anything.
There is a provision allowing judges to depart from minimum mandatory sentencing for folks convicted of doing something stupid and there is a provision to make it a little easier to get their arrest record expunged if charges are dropped or tossed by court.
Meh, one minor victory for convicted felons (they'll likely get three years instead of 10 or 20, which is a common plea deal offered to them anyway) and one positive provision on expungement.
But it won't prevent any arrests or prosecutions or help any defendants in their cases. :uhoh:
Last edited:
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
A warning shot is a bluff-in-action. You just proved that you have the gun, and that you have a legitiamte fear of imminent grave bodily harm and/or death, yet failed to stop the threat... Something about your actions is unfounded, or you're just really, really stupid...
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
Regardless of the rest; if you think she cheated on you, why would you touch her again? Why even be seen by such trash? You know it's trouble... And the following actions kinda give it away...
I'm calling the DNA test, not his. Any takers on that wager?
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
If for some reason I am in the vicinity of a warning shot when it is fired(my direction) I will not fire a warning shot. Just Sayin`
as has been stated many times out here...guilty pure and simple as the woman left a hostile environment for a safe zone ~ garage & car. she says the garage door wouldn't open but then grabbed a pistol from the vehicle and re-entered the hostile environment with the aggressor inside with the possible presumed intent of harming her husband.
also remember her offspring were in the house when she pulled the trigger and shot her 'warning shot' at her aggressor.
(side bar: if someone is charging me...wouldn't have missed so the shot wouldn't have been considered a warning shot)
"what ifs" ~ if she had locked herself in the vehicle, and the husband came into the garage and attempted to break in the vehicle, and she used the firearm...not guilty...
ipse
also remember her offspring were in the house when she pulled the trigger and shot her 'warning shot' at her aggressor.
(side bar: if someone is charging me...wouldn't have missed so the shot wouldn't have been considered a warning shot)
"what ifs" ~ if she had locked herself in the vehicle, and the husband came into the garage and attempted to break in the vehicle, and she used the firearm...not guilty...
ipse
Last edited:
notalawyer
Regular Member
The attached garage is part of the house, it's just like another bedroom. So the fact that she went there and retrieved the handgun is immaterial. The reason she was convicted is that the jury did not believe that she was in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.