The bill as amended passed the committee on a vote of 6 to 2 (1 Democrat joining with all of the Republicans)
Assembly Substitute Amendment 3 was approved - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/amendments/ab69/asa3_ab69
The bill will next go before the full State Assembly.
The Legislative Council attorney that staffs the committee is not in today, but I am told they will be issuing a memo next week which will be posted to the Bill History website at: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/proposals/ab69
List of registered Supporters and Opponents:
http://ethics.state.wi.us/scripts/currentSession/LegProps.asp?key=REGAB69
(Text From Assembly Substitute Amendment 3)
Under this substitute amendment, if a person used defensive force that was intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, a court in a criminal case against the person must presume that the person reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person if:
1) the individual against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had already unlawfully and forcefully entered, the dwelling, motor vehicle, or, in the case of a business owner or operator, place of business of the person who used the force;
2) the person was present in that dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business; and
3) the person knew or reasonably believed that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
This presumption, however, does not apply if:
1) the person who used the force was engaged in a criminal activity or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity; or
2) the individual against whom the force was used had identified himself or herself as a peace officer (or was or should have been known to be a peace officer) and was entering the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business in the performance of his or her official duties.
Under the substitute amendment, a person who uses force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm is immune from civil liability if the person reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent death or bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person and if:
1) the individual against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had already forcibly entered, the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business of the person who
used the force;
2) the person who used the force was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business; and
3) the person who used the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
Under the substitute amendment for purposes of civil immunity, a person is not presumed to have reasonably believed that the force was necessary if:
1) the person who used the force was engaged in a criminal activity or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity; or
2) the individual against whom the force was used had identified himself or herself as a peace officer (or was or should have been known to be a peace officer) and was entering the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business in the performance of his or her official duties.
Under the substitute amendment, if a court finds that person who is sued in civil court is immune from liability, the person is entitled to attorney fees, court costs, compensation for income loss, and other expenses the person incurred to defend himself or herself against the civil action.
Assembly Substitute Amendment 3 was approved - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/amendments/ab69/asa3_ab69
The bill will next go before the full State Assembly.
The Legislative Council attorney that staffs the committee is not in today, but I am told they will be issuing a memo next week which will be posted to the Bill History website at: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/proposals/ab69
List of registered Supporters and Opponents:
http://ethics.state.wi.us/scripts/currentSession/LegProps.asp?key=REGAB69
(Text From Assembly Substitute Amendment 3)
Under this substitute amendment, if a person used defensive force that was intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, a court in a criminal case against the person must presume that the person reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person if:
1) the individual against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had already unlawfully and forcefully entered, the dwelling, motor vehicle, or, in the case of a business owner or operator, place of business of the person who used the force;
2) the person was present in that dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business; and
3) the person knew or reasonably believed that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
This presumption, however, does not apply if:
1) the person who used the force was engaged in a criminal activity or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity; or
2) the individual against whom the force was used had identified himself or herself as a peace officer (or was or should have been known to be a peace officer) and was entering the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business in the performance of his or her official duties.
Under the substitute amendment, a person who uses force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm is immune from civil liability if the person reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent death or bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person and if:
1) the individual against whom the force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had already forcibly entered, the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business of the person who
used the force;
2) the person who used the force was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business; and
3) the person who used the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
Under the substitute amendment for purposes of civil immunity, a person is not presumed to have reasonably believed that the force was necessary if:
1) the person who used the force was engaged in a criminal activity or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity; or
2) the individual against whom the force was used had identified himself or herself as a peace officer (or was or should have been known to be a peace officer) and was entering the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business in the performance of his or her official duties.
Under the substitute amendment, if a court finds that person who is sued in civil court is immune from liability, the person is entitled to attorney fees, court costs, compensation for income loss, and other expenses the person incurred to defend himself or herself against the civil action.