Recently a colleague of mine from a different state reached
out to me and asked me to comment on the following question regarding Florida's
Stand Your Ground Law:
I was wondering if the law is misinterpreted by people
both inside and outside of Florida, and if yes, whether those
misinterpretations/misconceptions of the law are due to the media or other
sources. Also, whether the Florida self-defense statute is really that much
different from other state self-defense laws and the MPC.
Here is my response:
The short answer to this question is no there are not MAJOR
differences between FL self-defense laws and other jurisdictions (including
MPC) and yes there are major misinterpretations/misconceptions due to media,
other sources, and plain old ignorance.
The perception out there is that the "Stand Your Ground
Law" (which is really just one sentence in Florida Statutes Chapter 776
and is the law in several other states) creates the "Wild West" where
people can shoot anybody that looks at them funny and pay no consequences.
However, if people would just dig a little deeper under the surface and stop
accepting the talking points they would see that "Stand Your Ground
Laws" are a huge protection for Criminal Defendants, and have saved many,
many innocent people from going to jail.
In a nutshell what the “Stand Your Ground” provision of FL. Stat. Ch. 776 does is extend the castle doctrine of “no duty to retreat” from the home to any place a person has a lawful right to be. So in other words, if I’m standing on the sidewalk and somebody attacks me I don’t have to make that split second decision of whether or not I can safely retreat before I meet force with force.
Before the tragic story of the Trayvon Martin case (WHICH IS NOT A STAND YOUR GROUND CASE BTW!!!!!) there were several tragic stories of innocent individuals that defended themselves from brutal attacks, but because a crafty prosecutor argued effectively to a jury that the defendant could have safely retreated if he wanted to, those innocent individuals ended up going to prison for a very long time. That is the reason why we have Stand Your Ground laws, to protect people from being put in that impossible position of having to assess their surroundings, while at the same time being brutally attacked, and make a decision of whether or not they can safely retreat.
Have there been cases with
unfortunate outcomes because of the Stand Your Ground provision, of course, no
law is perfect. But as a Criminal Defense attorney I firmly believe that it is
better for 10 guilty men to walk free than for 1 innocent man to have his
liberty taken away. That is what Stand Your Ground does, it protects the
innocent, it protects our civil liberties, and it stops wily prosecutors from
using legal loopholes to send innocent people to prison. In my opinion, any
champion of our civil liberties should be a staunch supporter of Stand Your
Ground laws.
Also, let me take a quick second to clarify what I meant above when I said that the Trayvon Martin case was NOT a stand your ground case. When George Zimmerman made the decision to use deadly force and shoot Trayvon Martin, Trayvon Martin was mounted on top of George Zimmerman and was slamming his head into a concrete sidewalk. In that factual scenario George Zimmerman had no duty to retreat, not because of Stand Your Ground, but because it was physically impossible. He was on his back and could not move, therefore the Trayvon Martin case was a classic self-defense case, and not a “Stand Your Ground” case where someone had the opportunity to retreat but decided not to.