Hakkin kare kai a Maryland

(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant;

(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;

(3) The accused claiming the right of self defense must not have been the aggressor or provoked the conflict;

(4) The force used must have not been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force must not have been more force than the exigency demanded.

A cikin jihar Maryland, Hakkin kare kai galibi ana sarrafa shi ta hanyar shari'a, amma akwai kuma doka.

Ka'idoji na Gaba ɗaya

Maryland ta ci gaba da bin ka'idodin doka ta yau da kullun game da amfani da karfi a kare kai, kodayake akwai doka (wanda aka tattauna a ƙasa) game da batun kariya daga shari'ar farar hula don amfani da karfi don kare gida ko kasuwanci.

A cikin shari'ar Baltimore Transit Co. v. Faulkner, 179 Md. 598, 20 A.2d 485 (1941), wanda ya shafi karar farar hula don kai hari da batir, Kotun daukaka kara ta Maryland ta gabatar da ka'idojin doka na yau da kullun na koyarwar kare kai:

Dokar kare kai ta tabbatar da aikin da aka yi a cikin imani mai ma'ana na haɗari na gaggawa. Idan wanda ake tuhuma ya yi rauni a cikin kare kansa, ba za a iya hukunta shi da laifi ba ko kuma a ɗauke shi da alhakin lalacewa a cikin aikin farar hula. ... Wanda ke neman tabbatar da hari a kan kasa cewa ya yi don kare kansa dole ne ya nuna cewa bai yi amfani da karfi fiye da abin da ake bukata ba. Imani da wanda ake tuhuma ya yi a cikin wani mataki na hari cewa mai shigar da kara ya yi masa lahani na jiki ba zai iya tallafawa rokon kare kansa ba sai dai idan irin wannan imani ne kamar yadda mutum mai matsakaicin hankali zai yi a cikin irin wannan yanayi. Ya kamata a umarci juriya da cewa don tabbatar da hari da batir a kare kansa dole ne yanayin ya kasance kamar yadda zai haifar da mutum mai matsakaici don yin irin wannan hari don kare kansa.[s] Tambayar ko imanin wanda ake tuhuma cewa yana gab da raunin ya kasance mai ma'ana a duk yanayin tambaya ce don la'akari da juri.

Kotun daukaka kara ta ce a cikin shari'ar cewa, koda mai shigar da kara ya fara buga ma'aikatan wanda ake tuhuma, mai shigar da karar har yanzu yana da damar cin nasara a cikin wani mataki na batir idan ma'aikatan mai shigar daukaka kara, a cikin karkatar da ayyukan mai shigar da ƙara, "sun yi amfani da rashin ma'ana da karfi da yawa, ma'ana irin wannan karfi kamar maza masu hankali ba za su yi amfani da shi a duk yanayin shari'ar ba. " Id., 179 Md. a 600, 20 A.2d. a 487.

Amfani da Ƙarfin Mutuwa A Tsaro

Maryland kuma ta ci gaba da bin ka'idodin doka ta yau da kullun game da batun lokacin da mutum zai iya amfani da karfi mai kisa don kare kansa. A cikin shari'ar Jihar v. Faulkner, 301 Md. 482, 485, 483 A.2d 759, 761 (1984), Kotun daukaka kara ta Maryland ta taƙaita waɗannan ka'idojin, kuma ta bayyana cewa kisan kai, ban da kisan kai na laifi, ya cancanci ne a kan tushen kare kai idan an gamsu da ka'idoji masu zuwa:

It is a justifiable homicide to kill to prevent the commission of a felony by force or surprise.

The crimes in prevention of which life may be taken are such and only such as are committed by forcible means, violence, and surprise, such as murder, robbery, burglary, rape, or arson.

• * *
• * *

It is also essential that killing is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony in question. If other methods could prevent its commission, a homicide is not justified; all other means of preventing the crime must first be exhausted.

Dubi kuma Roach v. State, 358 Md. 418, 429-30, 749 A.2d 787, 793 (2000).

Bugu da ƙari, lokacin da mutum yake cikin gidansa, mutum na iya amfani da karfi mai kisa a kan mai kai farmaki idan karfi mai kisa ya zama dole don hana mai kai farmiki yin laifi wanda ya haɗa da amfani da karfi, tashin hankali, ko mamaki (kamar kisan kai, fashi, fashi da fyade, ko ƙonewa). Dubi Crawford v. Jihar, 231 Md. 354, 190 A.2d 538 (1963).

Ayyukan Komawa da Koyarwar Castle

Maryland kuma tana bin dokar doka ta yau da kullun cewa, a waje da gidan mutum, mutum, kafin ya yi amfani da karfi mai kisa a kare kansa, yana da aikin "'da koma baya ko guje wa haɗari idan irin waɗannan hanyoyin sun kasance a cikin ikonsa kuma sun dace da amincinsa.'" DeVaughn v. State, 232 Md. 447, 453, 194 A.2d 109, 112 (1963), tabbatacce. an hana shi, 376 US 527 (1964), inda ya nakalto Bruce v. State, 218 Md. 87, 97, 145 A.2d 428, 433 (1958). Dubi kuma Burch v. State, 346 Md. 253, 283, 696 A.2d 443, 458 (1997).

Amma mutum ba lallai bane ya koma baya idan ba zai zama lafiya ga mutumin ya yi hakan ba. "[I]f hadarin wanda ake tuhuma ya yi kusa, bai kamata ya koma baya ba amma yana da damar tsayawa da kuma kare kansa. " Bruce v. State, sama, 218 Md. a 97, 145 A.2d a 433.

Ayyukan janyewa ba su aiki ba idan an kai wa mutum hari a gidansa. "[Mutumin da ya fuskanci haɗarin kai hari a kan gidansa ba ya buƙatar komawa gida don tserewa daga haɗarin, amma a maimakon haka yana iya tsayawa a matsayinsa kuma, idan ya cancanta don kawar da harin, zai iya kashe mai kai farmaki. " Crawford v. State, 231 Md. 354, 361, 190 A.2d 538, 541 (1963). Kotun daukaka kara ta ce a Crawford, wani shari'ar da wanda ake tuhuma ya harbe wani saurayi wanda ke ƙoƙarin shiga gidansa don doke shi ya sace shi:

* * Ba a tilasta wa mutum ya janye daga gidansa ba. Zai iya tsayawa a can kuma ya kashe mutumin da ke ƙoƙarin aikata laifi a ciki, ko wanda ke ƙoƙarin shiga da karfi don manufar aikata laifi, ko kuma haifar da mummunan rauni a jiki ga fursuna.[y] A irin wannan yanayin mai shi ko kowane memba na iyali, ko ma mai masauki a cikin gidan, na iya saduwa da mai shigowa a ƙofar, kuma ya hana shi shiga ta kowace hanya da ake buƙata, har ma da ɗaukar ransa, kuma kisan zai zama daidai.

Wannan ka'idar an san ta da "Castle Doctrine", sunan da aka samo daga ra'ayin cewa "'gidan mutum shine gidansa' da kuma mafakarsa ta ƙarshe. " Barton v. State, 46 Md. App. 616, 618, 420 A.2d 1009, 1010-1011 (1980). Mutum "ba lallai bane ya gudu kuma ya zama mai tsere daga gidansa, domin, idan an buƙaci hakan, ba za a sami mafaka a gare shi a ko'ina cikin duniya ba".

Mutum ba lallai bane ya zama mai gidan ko shugaban gidan don ya iya kiran "Castle Doctrine. " Maimakon haka, "kowane memba na gidan, ko yana da mallakar ko kuma yana da sha'awar mallakar dukiyar, yana cikin mahallinsa. ... " .

Koyaya, ko da a cikin gidan mutum, matakin ƙarfin da aka yi amfani da shi don kare kansa dole ne ya zama "ya wuce gona da iri". Crawford v. State, sama, 231 Md. a 362, 190 A.2d a 542. Da yake ambaton wata takarda game da dokar aikata laifuka, Kotun daukaka kara ta ce a Crawford:

a. Defense of Self, Another or Property

Persons are not responsible for assault or battery if they were defending themselves, other persons, their property or their employer's property, so long as they used only such force as was reasonably necessary to protect themselves, other persons, their property, or their employer's property from actual attack or threat of imminent harm. Threat of imminent harm does not mean that one must wait until the other person makes the first move.

b. Use of Deadly Force

A person may use deadly force only as a last resort. The person must reasonably believe that he or she or a third person was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm and that there was no other reasonable means of defense or ability to escape.

Nauyin Tabbacin Tsaro

Kodayake ana kiran kare kai "tsaron kai," wanda ake tuhuma wanda ke kiran kare kansa a cikin shari'ar laifi a Maryland ba shi da nauyin tabbatar da cewa ya yi aiki don kare kansa.

Maimakon haka, wanda ake tuhuma a cikin shari'ar aikata laifuka kawai yana da nauyin samarwa akan batun kare kansa. Wannan yana nufin cewa wanda ake tuhuma wanda yake so ya kira koyarwar kawai yana buƙatar "samar da batun" ta hanyar gabatar da wasu shaidu cewa ya yi aiki don kare kansa. Idan wanda ake tuhuma ya gamsar da wannan nauyin samarwa kuma ta haka ne ya haifar da batun, to, mai gabatar da kara ne ke da nauyin tabbatar da cewa wanda ake tuhumar bai yi aiki don kare kansa ba. A wasu kalmomi, da zarar wanda ake tuhuma ya gamsar da nauyinsa na samarwa a kan batun kare kansa, to mai gabatar da kara yana da nauyin rinjaye a kan batun tsaro.

Idan wanda ake tuhuma bai haifar da batun kare kansa ba, to mai gabatar da kara ba zai tabbatar da cewa wanda ake tuhumar bai yi aiki don kare kansa ba.

Kotun daukaka kara ta Maryland ta karɓi waɗannan ƙa'idodin a cikin shari'ar Jihar v. Evans, 278 Md. 197, 207-08, 362 A.2d 629, 636 (1976). Kotun ta ce rarraba nauyin samarwa da rinjaye ta wannan hanyar ya buƙaci hukuncin Kotun Koli a cikin Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 US 684 (1975).

OA cikin shari'o'in farar hula, akasin haka, kare kai ya kasance karewa, ma'ana cewa nauyin tabbatar da amfani da shi yana kan wanda ake tuhuma. Dubi Baltimore Transit Co. v. Faulkner, sama, 179 Md. a 600-01, 20 A.2d a 487.

Umurnin Juri na Tsarin Tsaro a cikin Laifuka

Idan an cika ma'auni na aiki zuwa janyewa, to ana bincika ka'idojin kare kai masu zuwa, kamar yadda ke cikin Instruction of Criminal Pattern Jury na Maryland. Zaɓuɓɓuka ko madadin shigarwa a cikin umarnin juriya an rufe su da < >. Kalmomin da ke kewaye da () ana maye gurbinsu da takamaiman lokuta na shari'ar.

Tsaron kai (MPJI-Cr 5:07)

Tsaron kai shine karewa, kuma dole ne a sami wanda ake tuhuma ba shi da laifi idan duk abubuwan da suka biyo baya guda uku suna nan:

1. Wanda ake tuhuma ya yi imanin cewa <su> suna cikin haɗarin rauni na jiki.
2. Imani na wanda ake tuhuma yana da ma'ana.
3. Wanda ake tuhuma bai yi amfani da karfi fiye da yadda ya kamata ya kare kansu ba saboda barazanar da ake yi ko ainihin cutar.

"Ƙarfin kisa shine adadin ƙarfin da aka lissafa don haifar da mutuwa ko mummunan rauni a jiki. Idan an gano wanda ake tuhuma ya yi amfani da ƙarfin kisa, dole ne a yanke shawara ko amfani da ƙarfin mutuwa yana da ma'ana. Ƙarfin kisa yana da maɓallin idan wanda ake tuhumar a zahiri yana da imani mai ma'ana cewa ƙarfin mai kai ya kasance ko zai zama mai kisa kuma wanda ake tuhumi yana buƙatar amsawar ƙarfin kisa".

"Bugu da kari, kafin amfani da karfi mai kisa, ana buƙatar wanda ake tuhuma ya yi duk wani kokari mai ma'ana don komawa baya. Wanda ake tuhuma ba dole ba ne ya koma baya idan wanda ake tuhumar ya kasance a cikin gida, koma baya ba shi da aminci, hanyar koma baya ba ta san wanda ake tuhume-tuhume ba, ana satar wanda ake tuhumi ya kama wanda aka azabtar da doka. Idan an gano wanda ake tuhumarsa bai yi amfani da karfi ba, to wanda ake tuhumu ba shi da aikin komawa baya. "

Tsaron Sauran (MPJI-Cr 5:01)

Tsaron wasu shine karewa, kuma dole ne a sami wanda ake tuhuma ba shi da laifi idan duk abubuwan da suka biyo baya guda huɗu suna nan:

1. Wanda ake tuhuma ya yi imanin cewa mutumin da aka kare yana cikin haɗarin rauni na jiki.
2. Imani na wanda ake tuhuma yana da ma'ana.
3. Wanda ake tuhuma bai yi amfani da karfi fiye da yadda ya kamata don kare mutumin da aka kare ba saboda barazanar ko ainihin karfi.
4. Manufar wanda ake tuhuma ta amfani da karfi shine don taimakawa mutumin da ake karewa.

Tsaro na Gida - Ƙarfin Mutuwa (MPJI-Cr 5:02)

Tsaron gidan mutum shine karewa, kuma dole ne a sami wanda ake tuhuma ba shi da laifi idan duk abubuwan da suka biyo baya guda uku suna nan:

1. Wanda ake tuhuma ya yi imanin cewa (wanda ake zargi) yana aikata <ya kusan aikata> laifin (laifi) a cikin <a> gidan wanda ake tuhuma.
2. Imani na wanda ake tuhuma yana da ma'ana.
3. Wanda ake tuhuma bai yi amfani da karfi fiye da yadda ya kamata ya kare kansa daga halin (wanda aka azabtar).

Tsaron dukiya shine karewa, kuma dole ne a sami wanda ake tuhuma ba shi da laifi idan duk abubuwan da suka biyo baya guda uku suna nan:

1. Wanda ake tuhuma ya yi imanin cewa (wanda ake zargi) yana tsoma baki ba bisa ka'ida ba <yana gab da tsoma baki ba tare da doka ba> tare da dukiya.
2. Imani na wanda ake tuhuma yana da ma'ana.
3. Wanda ake tuhuma bai yi amfani da karfi fiye da yadda ya kamata ba don karewa daga tsangwama daga wanda aka azabtar da dukiyar.

"Mutum ba zai iya amfani da karfi mai kisa don kare dukiyarsa ba. karfi mai kisa shine adadin karfi da aka lissafa don haifar da mutuwa ko mummunan rauni a jiki. "

Umurnin Juri na Tsarin Tsaro a cikin Shari'o'in Jama'a

Maryland Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 15:4 (a) & (b) ya ce:

(a) In this section, "person" does not include a governmental entity.

(b) A person is not liable for damages for a personal injury or death of an individual who enters the person's dwelling or place of business if:

(1) The person reasonably believes that force or deadly force is necessary to repel an attack by the individual; and (2) The amount and nature of the force used by the person is reasonable under the circumstances.

(c) Subsection (b) of this section does not apply to a person who is convicted of a crime of violence under § 14-101 of the Criminal Law Article, assault in the second degree, or reckless endangerment arising out of the circumstances described in subsection (b) of this section.

(d) The court may award costs and reasonable attorney's fees to a defendant who prevails in a defense under this section.

(e) This section does not limit or abrogate any immunity from civil liability or defense available to a person under any other provision of the Code or at common law.

Rashin rigakafin jama'a

Duk da yake amfani da karfi a kare kansa na iya zama mai adalci, mutumin da ke kare kansa ko kansa har yanzu yana cikin haɗarin kai masa karar don lalacewar kuɗi. A shekara ta 2010, Babban Taron Maryland ya wuce, kuma Gwamna Martin O'Malley ya sanya hannu, wani lissafi don magance wannan batun da kuma samar da kariya ga irin waɗannan shari'o'in farar hula a wasu lokuta inda mutum ya yi amfani da karfi, gami da karfi mai kisa, don kare gidansa ko kasuwancinsa. Dokar - § 5-808 na Kotuna da Ayyukan Shari'a Mataki na Dokar Maryland - ya ba da kamar haka:

Dokar ta tsara dokar kare kai ta yau da kullun. Ana iya jayayya cewa dokar ta sa "Castle Doctrine" ta dace da ayyukan da aka yi don kare kasuwancin mutum. Amma dokar ba ta bayyana a wannan batu ba, saboda abin da ake buƙata cewa karfi ta kasance "mai ma'ana a ƙarƙashin yanayi" da kuma rashin takamaiman harshe yana cewa wanda ake tuhuma na iya tsayawa a cikin kasuwancin. Abu mai mahimmanci, dokar ta kuma ba da cewa, idan wanda ake tuhuma ya ci nasara a cikin karewa a ƙarƙashin dokar, to kotun "zai iya" umarci mai shigar da kara ya biya kuɗin wanda ake tuhumar da kuma kuɗin lauya mai ma'ana. Dokar ta ci gaba da bayar da cewa rigakafin da ta kirkira ba ya aiki idan an yanke wa wanda ake tuhuma hukunci kan wasu tuhume-tuhumen laifi dangane da lamarin.

Ta hanyar sharuddansa, dokar ba ta shafi gurfanar da laifi ba.

Babban Taron ya kafa dokar shekaru tara bayan wani abin da ya faru a daren Maris 19, 2001, inda daya ko duka biyu daga cikin masu haɗin gwiwar kamfanin siminti a Glyndon, Maryland suka bude wuta a kan masu shiga tsakani uku a gidan kamfanin, suka kashe daya daga cikinsu kuma suka ji wa sauran biyu rauni. Har ila yau, an yi fashi da gidan kamfanin a cikin dare biyu da suka gabata, kuma masu haɗin gwiwa guda biyu (waɗanda su ne 'yan'uwa) suna kwana a kasuwancin don kiyaye shi. A watan Fabrairun shekara ta 2004, dukiya da ƙaramin ɗan marigayin sun kai karar 'yan uwan biyu da kamfaninsu don lalacewa. Dangane da bayanan kan layi na tsarin kotun Maryland, masu shigar da kara sun sauke karar a ranar 28 ga Janairu, 2005. Ba a bayyana a cikin bayanan kan layi ko an warware lamarin ba.

A cikin kwanaki na harbi a shekara ta 2001, an gabatar da takardun kudi a kowane ɗaki biyu na Babban Taron don kare masu kasuwanci daga karar farar hula don kisa a kan mutumin da "wanda ya shiga cikin kasuwancin ba bisa ka'ida ba". Majalisar Dattijai ta jihar ta zartar da lissafinta, amma Majalisar Wakilai ba ta dauki mataki a kan ma'auni ko a kan lissafin da aka gabatar a cikin Majalisar ba. A cikin 2004, 2005, 2008, da 2009, Majalisar Wakilai ta zartar da takardun kudi a kan batun, amma babu wani daga cikin takardun da ya fito daga kwamitin a Majalisar Dattijai ta jihar. Dokar da Majalisar Dattijai ta kafa a cikin 2010 tana da kalmomin da suka bambanta da yaren takardun da suka gabata.

Dubi kuma

• Koyarwar Castle