Definition of a Stand Your Ground Law
A "Stand Your Ground" law is a self-defense law that allows a person to use force, up to and including deadly force, without first attempting to retreat in certain situations. Many states have such laws. One typical limit to "stand your ground" laws is that a person may only use deadly force if the person believes that they are in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. One significant distinction is that many "stand your ground" laws require an absence of alternatives such as calling the police or attempting to retreat before deadly force is used.
The most familiar example of a stand your ground law in the United States is Florida’s law, which makes optional a duty to retreat before using deadly force in the face of a threat, as long as the threatened person is not in their dwelling or vehicle.
Tennessee has similar laws that are different in some respects from Florida’s law. The Tennessee self-defense statute is known as the "Castle Doctrine" which allows you to "stand your ground" under certain circumstances . The Castle Doctrine states that: it is presumed reasonable that a person has a right to be in his or her home, residence, and/or occupied motor vehicle; they have a right to defend themselves with the use of or threats to the use of force upon another if they believe it is reasonably necessary to protect themselves from that other person’s unlawful entry or attack; and that the use of deadly force that results in the death of another person is justified when they have a reasonable belief of an imminent risk of serious bodily injury or death of the person they used deadly force upon.
Unlike Florida, this law does not remove the duty to retreat. The Tennessee self-defense law requires a person to retreat outside of his/her home/vehicle if he/she knows they can do so in complete safety. If they cannot completely escape in total safety, only then may they use force.
These issues can require a thorough analysis of the facts by an experienced criminal defense attorney.
An Overview of Tennessee’s Stand Your Ground Law
The Castle Doctrine provides that a person’s home is their castle and they, therefore, have the right to use deadly force within it without being required to retreat from an intruder. However, in many states, the doctrine has expanded beyond the home to include places where people had previously been required to attempt a retreat before using deadly force in self-defense. This is commonly referred to as "Stand Your Ground." In Tennessee, Stand Your Ground is codified at T.C.A. §39-11-611(g) which provides:
(g) (1) A person is justified in using force against another if the person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to the person or a third party. The person in danger of serious bodily injury or death is not required to retreat if the person is in a place where the person has the right to be.
(2) The person defending against the use of force under subsection (g) is not required to retreat but may stand the ground the person occupies and meet any force intended to cause death or serious bodily injury with deadly force.
(3) The person is presumed to have a reasonable belief of imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to the person or a third party if the person is not engaged in unlawful activity, is in a place where the person has a right to be, and the use of force involves the use of a firearm.
The presumption of justification also extends to the defense of others as long as the elements of the justification are met for both the person defending and the person being defended.
In 2012, the Stand Your Ground statute was amended to make clear that the justification of self-defense was available in a prosecution for any charge, including a charge of first degree murder, especially when committed with a deadly weapon. It also extended the scope of immunity to include persons who were not engaged in illegal activity, were attacked in any place where they had the right to be, and who had a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary.
In 2014, the immunity provisions of the Stand Your Ground law were challenged for the first time. In Tennison v. State, the defendant argued that the Stand Your Ground statute provided immunity for a person who used deadly force and was later charged. The trial judge granted immunity to the defendant pursuant to the immunity provision of paragraph (a) of Tennessee’s Stand Your Ground statute. The State appealed on the grounds that the defendant failed to establish that he was NOT engaged in criminal activity as the statute requires for immunity. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that the immunity remained in place through trial and on its own motion reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence on which the immunity ruling was based. It was found that the evidence did not support a finding that the Defendant met all the elements for a claim of self-defense, and the trial court’s dismissal of the State’s case without a trial was erroneous.
Legal Criteria and Restrictions
Legally speaking, there must be certain factors in play in order for the Stand Your Ground defense to be invoked. The first is possession. In Tennessee, you must be legally in possession of a weapon. If you are carrying a weapon illegally and you use that weapon for self-defense, the Stand Your Ground defense will be denied. So, if at the time of the altercation you are legally carrying a weapon, you cannot be the one to initiate the encounter. That is a major point for which the state will argue against your defense. You will be charged with initiating the altercation and as it stands in Tennessee law, you should first attempt to retreat from the altercation before using force.
Then there is the issue of the firearm at hand being civilly-permitted for use. For instance, let’s say that you have a concealed carry permit. You are allowed by law to carry your firearm. However, there are caveats to this carry permit. You are not allowed to carry your firearm in the emergency room, in a daycare center, in an alcoholic treatment facility or a mental health facility. If you were to use your concealed carry firearm in any of these places, you would likely be charged with a crime. All of that said, it would make perfect sense that if you cannot carry your permitted firearm in some places, you are not permitted to use the firearm to initiate an encounter when a potential for it exists.
The last factor to consider is that your initial usage of a firearm must be for the purpose of protecting yourself or someone else. If it can be shown that you used your firearm in a malicious manner, you will be prosecuted for that action. The Stand Your Ground defense applies only when you are acting in self-defense.
Comparison of Tennessee’s and Other States’ Laws
Like many states, Tennessee’s Stand Your Ground law didn’t originate in a vacuum. Many other states have similar laws on the books, and there are even some non-Stand Your Ground states that treat self-defense in similar ways.
Tennessee Stand Your Ground Law vs. Florida Stand Your Ground Law
While other states have made adjustments to their Stand Your Ground laws since the pioneering reforms in Florida, Tennessee stands as an outlier. It does not require a retreat before using deadly force in self-defense. Florida Stand Your Ground law applies analysis that seems similar to Tennessee law, so an in-depth comparison reveals differences. In order to use deadly force in the Sunshine State, a person has to prove that he/she had a reasonable fear that his/her life was in danger. If one thinks that deadly force isn’t necessary after the attack confers danger, then the law requires that a person take all reasonable measures to avoid injury. It appears that Tennessee statutes are more forgiving when it comes to retreating. In Tennessee, the law presumes that everyone has retreated to the point where one can without unreasonably placing himself/herself in the harm’s way.
South Dakota Stand Your Ground Law
In 2019, South Dakota signed into law what the state bills itself to be the first "Stand your ground" statute in the Midwest. After a provision of self-defense was challenged, it was replaced. The changes allow the use of deadly force if a reasonable person believed that to refrain from the act would put him/her in jeopardy of great bodily harm or death.
Michigan Stand Your Ground Law
Michigan law allows for Stand Your Ground. The law does not require that one person retreat before using deadly force; that is only required if the use of deadly force is unlawful. Michigan law does not consider a duty to retreat unless you are about to use deadly force in response to deadly physical force against you.
Conclusion
Defining adaptability is essential to understanding the Stand Your Ground laws in Tennessee which are ever-changing. Currently, Tennessee is retaining Stand Your Ground Laws and considering further expansion.
Relevant Cases and History of Tennessee Stand Your Ground Law
Tennessee has not had a great number of cases addressing the "Stand Your Ground" or "Castle Doctrine" topics. One case that involved a "stand your ground" defense argument in Tennessee is State of Tennessee v. Eugene Drewery. Drewery was charged with first degree murder in the death of his roommate, Tiffany Latham. Drewery claimed that Latham had attacked him with a knife when he was on the floor of his bedroom. Latham died from stab wounds and the gunshot. Drewery asserted self defense and the Castle Doctrine as a defense to the charge. State of Tennessee v. Eugene Drewery 360 S.W.3d 434 (2012).
The evidence that Drewery argued supported self defense was that Latham had previously threatened to kill Drewery and she had admitted to their co-worker Carla that she had hit Drewery with a knife. Testimony showed they had a risky lifestyle, attempting to sell guns and other contraband. They had gotten into fights over money issues. Latham had stolen his gun and he had stolen her money. Latham was known to use drugs such as heroin and methadone.
Drewery and Latham returned to Drewery’s home after a night of drinking. He went to sleep and her son, Jalen, had taken a nap on his bed, then woke up and came into the bedroom. The evidence was that Drewery shot the victim when she entered the bedroom. Drewery testified that she awoke in the middle of the night and began choking and kicking him. He got out of bed and ran to the closet because he thought she was going to get a knife that had been left there. When she returned to the bedroom, he thought she was scratching him and he turned to look to see what she was doing. "At that point, he [Drewery] said he felt pain and thought she was choking him." Drewery shot her. He also shot Jalen , who was three years old. Drewery argued that Jalen had attacked him also. Drewery claimed that Latham was on top of him and a knife was sticking out from Latham’s hand. Prior to trial, the state filed a motion in limine to exclude self defense and the Castle Doctrine instructions under Tennessee Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 39.10, which incorporates the immunity provision of the Castle Doctrine. The trial court granted the State’s motion to exclude.
Because Drewery’s only testimony about the attack was that his roommate had "attacked" him, the trial court’s conclusion that the evidence does not establish "imminent" danger is not erroneous. The issue of self defense must be considered within context of the facts alleged by the defendant or proven by the state. The provision of the Castle Doctrine that applies here, although not invoked by Drewery at trial, is codified at Tennessee Code Annotated, section 39-11-611(b): The use or threatened use of force in defense of a habitation under this provision is justified if: 1) The person using or threatening to use force is not the initial aggressor, or does not have a duty to retreat, and the person has a reasonable belief that the other person intends to commit a felony in the person’s habitation or intends to do serious bodily injury to anyone, and 2) The use or threatened use of force is immediately necessary to prevent the commission or attempted commission of the specified unlawful act in the person’s habitation.
Self-defense and the Castle Doctrine defense are affirmative defenses that require evidence be introduced by the defendant and generally he or she will have the burden of proof by a preponderance of evidence that they were justified in shooting.
Support and Opposition
Supporters of the law argue that it is necessary to provide legal protections for people who find themselves in life-threatening situations where they must make split-second decisions. They maintain that individuals have the right to protect themselves, and that the law is a crucial element of that right. Advocates of the law often cite the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, asserting that the right to bear arms extends to having the right to use those arms to defend oneself if necessary. Backed by gun owners’ groups, the supporters warn that without such a law, law-abiding citizens would be vulnerable to criminal attack, and that there would be a chilling effect on gun owners’ rights to use their weapons for self-defense. Proponents also argue that Florida’s crime rate has fallen since its Stand Your Ground law was passed, and that there has not been an apparent increase in vigilantism or misuse of the law. (Vigilantism is directly forbidden by the law, which explicitly states that the law does not apply in such a scenario.)
Rather than seeing lower levels of violent crime, however, data from the FBI’s Universal Crime Report collecting data on aggravated assault rates indicate that even as other states began adopting some variation of Stand Your Ground laws, Tennessee’s aggravated assault rates have gone up steadily on an upward trend since the law’s passing. Critics of the law point to its initiation of these higher assault rates in the state to argue that rather than being a deterrent to crime, the law has helped create or exacerbate the problem of increased violence in the state. Further, the bill specifically states that it does not apply to any crime committed against someone "whom the person against whom force is used knows or has reason to know is attempting to commit a criminal offense in the dwelling, business or occupied motor vehicle of such person." Critics of the law are concerned that because the law has no provision for establishing whether a particular home invasion is in fact "risky," for all intents and purposes the law could be used to legally justify vigilante killings of people who may bother the invoker of the law in any way. The law also allows individuals to claim—without obtaining a court ruling on the matter—that they were acting in self-defense; this fear is compounded by the fact that many presiding judges in Nashville rule that they cannot explicitly instruct juries to disregard the law’s presumption of self-defense if they are determining at trial whether a defendant acted in self-defense or not. This lack of jury instruction may be why no cases have issued in state appellate court thus far addressing the issue of when and how the law should be applied.
Implications for Tennesseans
Tennessee’s stand your ground law has several key practical implications for Tennessee residents. These are:
1. There is a preference for deadly force in confronting a threat.
The implicit meaning of self-defense, as described above, emphasizes that there is a strong preference for the use of deadly force as means of self-defense in Tennessee. In approving this article, recognizing the potential lethality inherent in such a presumption, the Attorney General’s office applied the following limitations:
First, wherever possible, people are expected to retreat from a confrontation and avoid using violence. Therefore, the use of deadly physical force against the other person is justifiable only if the person using the force reasonably believes that the force is needed to prevent graves bodily injury, including death, to themselves or another; or to prevent the commission of a crime involving the use of force while the person using the force is in a place he or she is allowed to be.
Second, when deadly force is used, it can only be used if necessary to prevent graves bodily injury to the actor or a third person. Remember: being subjected to merely offensive physical contact is not enough. Deadly force is an option only where there is a reasonable belief that the other person’s actions will cause serious bodily injury, such as broken bones or death.
Third, you are prohibited from acting with the purpose of harming or killing an intruder in your home. But the law is clear that even if it is your purpose to merely hurt the intruder, you are still justified in using deadly force to protect yourself or another person in your home because the law requires that the dwelling remain free of unwanted intruders.
Finally, be careful. Even if the "stand your ground" law applies to a given situation, the mere fact that a citizen believes the law allows them to act does not make it so, even when a prosecutor or judge address the situation. The final interpretation of the law is up to a jury, and it’s important to keep in mind that a jury can find a defendant guilty even when the law otherwise seems to support the act.
2. It does not justify vigilante behavior.
While Tennessee’s stand your ground law was originally codified to address situations where a home stand-in would be justified in the use of violence in confronting an intruder , the provision has been interpreted by Tennessee’s general assembly to also apply to private property and public places. The practical implication of this is that any person whose actions are informed by the law may act in self-defense anywhere he or she happens to need it, provided that the use of force is deemed necessary in accordance with the above guidelines.
In recent years, several high-profile cases have been tested in court with respect to self-defense applied more generally. One of the most well-known of such cases is that of George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch coordinator found innocent in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. While the case received national attention, the crux of the question was whether Zimmerman was acting in self-defense or advancing his own interests through physically coercive measures.
While the "stand your ground" law might appear to legitimize acts of vigilante violence, such violent acts might be construed as prima facie violations of state law, specifically those addressing the act of carrying a handgun with intent to commit a crime. Praised or condemned as vigilante justice, even adherents of the act and self-defense advocates do not believe that the law should be interpreted to justify preemptive action or violence delivered at "will or whim" (as did Zimmerman).
3. It applies to all persons.
It’s important to note that Tennessee’s stand your ground law treats all persons equally. That means that the provision does not distinguish between a person’s race, gender, sexual orientation, wealth, or anything else that might provide distinction to Tennessee residents.
Just as an actor in a legal drama, you must suspend your belief in the selective enforcement of the law and consider how it might affect you as a result of its application to all people. This might involve staying home or living in a different place, but the principally guaranteed right to self-defense is exclusively a civil right. It’s a right everyone is entitled to, and the state is obliged to defend it.