Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335 (2026)
Justification: Use of deadly force in defense of self
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 11.81.335. Justification: Use of deadly force in defense of self.
(a) Except as provided in (b) of this section, a person who is justified in using nondeadly force in self-defense under AS 11.81.330 may use deadly force in self-defense upon another person when and to the extent the person reasonably believes the use of deadly force is necessary for self-defense against
(1) death;
(2) serious physical injury;
(3) kidnapping, except for what is described as custodial interference in the first degree in AS 11.41.320;
(4) sexual assault in the first degree;
(5) sexual assault in the second degree;
(6) sexual abuse of a minor in the first degree; or
(7) robbery in any degree.
(b) A person may not use deadly force under this section if the person knows that, with complete personal safety and with complete safety as to others being defended, the person can avoid the necessity of using deadly force by leaving the area of the encounter, except there is no duty to leave the area if the person is
(1) on premises
(A) that the person owns or leases;
(B) where the person resides, temporarily or permanently; or
(C) as a guest or express or implied agent of the owner, lessor, or resident;
(2) a peace officer acting within the scope and authority of the officer's employment or a person assisting a peace officer under AS 11.81.380;
(3) in a building where the person works in the ordinary course of the person's employment;
(4) protecting a child or a member of the person's household; or
(5) in any other place where the person has a right to be.
(a) Except as provided in (b) of this section, a person who is justified in using nondeadly force in self-defense under AS 11.81.330 may use deadly force in self-defense upon another person when and to the extent the person reasonably believes the use of deadly force is necessary for self-defense against
(1) death;
(2) serious physical injury;
(3) kidnapping, except for what is described as custodial interference in the first degree in AS 11.41.320;
(4) sexual assault in the first degree;
(5) sexual assault in the second degree;
(6) sexual abuse of a minor in the first degree; or
(7) robbery in any degree.
(b) A person may not use deadly force under this section if the person knows that, with complete personal safety and with complete safety as to others being defended, the person can avoid the necessity of using deadly force by leaving the area of the encounter, except there is no duty to leave the area if the person is
(1) on premises
(A) that the person owns or leases;
(B) where the person resides, temporarily or permanently; or
(C) as a guest or express or implied agent of the owner, lessor, or resident;
(2) a peace officer acting within the scope and authority of the officer's employment or a person assisting a peace officer under AS 11.81.380;
(3) in a building where the person works in the ordinary course of the person's employment;
(4) protecting a child or a member of the person's household; or
(5) in any other place where the person has a right to be.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2022 · leading case: Marquinn Jones-Nelson v. State of Alaska, 512 P.3d 665 (Alaska 2022).
Marquinn Jones-Nelson v. State of Alaska, 512 P.3d 665 (Alaska 2022). “900(b)(16), the defendant must show that the additional requirements of AS 11.81.335 are satisfied.29 A person is entitled to use deadly force in self-defense if nondeadly force is justified under AS 11.”
Weston v. State, 682 P.2d 1119 (Alaska 1984). “AS 11.81.335. [1] Thus, to employ self-defense a defendant must satisfy both an objective and subjective standard; he must have actually believed deadly force was necessary to protect himself, and his belief must be one that a reasonable person would have held under the…”
Folger v. State, 648 P.2d 111 (Alaska Ct. App. 1982). “330 and AS 11.81.335. [1] The evidence taken in the light most favorable to the defendant reveals the following: a dance held in the Tanana Community Hall on June 13, 1981 lasted through the early morning hours of June 14.”
Houston v. State, 602 P.2d 784 (Alaska 1979). “Section 11.81.335 specifies the circumstances under which the use of deadly force in self-defense is appropriate.”
Lamont v. State, 934 P.2d 774 (Alaska Ct. App. 1997). “Use of deadly force in self defense is defined in AS 11.81.335, which provides, in relevant part: (a) Except as provided in (b) of this section, a person may use deadly force upon another person when and to the extent (1) the use of nondeadly force is justified under AS 11.”
Hamilton v. State, 59 P.3d 760 (Alaska Ct. App. 2002). “[22] See AS 11.81.335 ("use of deadly force in defense of self").”
People v. Toler, 9 P.3d 341 (Colo. 2000). “, Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335 (b) (Mi-chie 1999) (requiring that a person retreat if possible with complete safety before using deadly force, except in defense of premises or within the scope of peace officer's authority); Del.”
Brown v. State, 698 P.2d 671 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985). “See AS 11.81.335(a)(1), AS 11.81.330(a)(3). The state maintains that, since as a matter of law Brown was not entitled to any self-defense instruction, he could not have suffered prejudice from the incorrect self-defense instruction.”
Yoder Austin Blalock v. State of Alaska, State of Alaska v. Yoder Austin Blalock, 452 P.3d 675 (Alaska Ct. App. 2019). “Blalock argued in the trial court that the “Stand Your Ground” amendment was not a substantive change in the law but rather was simply a “clarification” of existing law, and that therefore due process required that the effective date of the “clarification” was the date of the…”
Gaona v. State, 630 P.2d 534 (Alaska Ct. App. 1981). “330 and AS 11.81.335. [9] Moreau v. State, 588 P.”
Williamson v. State, 692 P.2d 965 (Alaska Ct. App. 1984). “" [3] The jury was instructed in conformity with former AS 11.81.335 that "[a] person may not use deadly force .”
Xi Van Ha v. State, 892 P.2d 184 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995). “900(b)(12), then a claim of self-defense must additionally satisfy the requirements of AS 11.81.335. Section 335(a) limits deadly force to situations in which (1) the force is justified under AS 11.”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335(a) — 5 cases
Marquinn Jones-Nelson v. State of Alaska, 512 P.3d 665 (Alaska 2022). “900(b)(16), the defendant must show that the additional requirements of AS 11.81.335 are satisfied.29 A person is entitled to use deadly force in self-defense if nondeadly force is justified under AS 11.”
Allen v. State, 945 P.2d 1233 (Alaska Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Walker, 887 P.2d 971 (Alaska Ct. App. 1994).
Matthew Foy v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2022).
Matthew Foy v. State of Alaska (Alaska Ct. App. 2022).
— Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335(a)(1) — 3 cases
Brown v. State, 698 P.2d 671 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985). “See AS 11.81.335(a)(1), AS 11.81.330(a)(3). The state maintains that, since as a matter of law Brown was not entitled to any self-defense instruction, he could not have suffered prejudice from the incorrect self-defense instruction.”
Silvera v. State, 244 P.3d 1138 (Alaska Ct. App. 2010).
Lamont v. State, 934 P.2d 774 (Alaska Ct. App. 1997). “Use of deadly force in self defense is defined in AS 11.81.335, which provides, in relevant part: (a) Except as provided in (b) of this section, a person may use deadly force upon another person when and to the extent (1) the use of nondeadly force is justified under AS 11.”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335(a)(2) — 4 cases
Howell v. State, 917 P.2d 1202 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996).
Lamont v. State, 934 P.2d 774 (Alaska Ct. App. 1997). “Use of deadly force in self defense is defined in AS 11.81.335, which provides, in relevant part: (a) Except as provided in (b) of this section, a person may use deadly force upon another person when and to the extent (1) the use of nondeadly force is justified under AS 11.”
Hilbish v. State, 891 P.2d 841 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995).
Brown v. Mun. of Anchorage, 915 P.2d 654 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996).
— Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335(b) — 8 cases
Weston v. State, 682 P.2d 1119 (Alaska 1984). “AS 11.81.335. [1] Thus, to employ self-defense a defendant must satisfy both an objective and subjective standard; he must have actually believed deadly force was necessary to protect himself, and his belief must be one that a reasonable person would have held under the…”
Seibold v. State, 959 P.2d 780 (Alaska Ct. App. 1998).
Lamont v. State, 934 P.2d 774 (Alaska Ct. App. 1997). “Use of deadly force in self defense is defined in AS 11.81.335, which provides, in relevant part: (a) Except as provided in (b) of this section, a person may use deadly force upon another person when and to the extent (1) the use of nondeadly force is justified under AS 11.”
Brown v. State, 698 P.2d 671 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985). “See AS 11.81.335(a)(1), AS 11.81.330(a)(3). The state maintains that, since as a matter of law Brown was not entitled to any self-defense instruction, he could not have suffered prejudice from the incorrect self-defense instruction.”
Yoder Austin Blalock v. State of Alaska, State of Alaska v. Yoder Austin Blalock, 452 P.3d 675 (Alaska Ct. App. 2019). “Blalock argued in the trial court that the “Stand Your Ground” amendment was not a substantive change in the law but rather was simply a “clarification” of existing law, and that therefore due process required that the effective date of the “clarification” was the date of the…”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335(b)(1) — 2 cases
Stapleton v. State, 696 P.2d 180 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985).
Yoder Austin Blalock v. State of Alaska, State of Alaska v. Yoder Austin Blalock, 452 P.3d 675 (Alaska Ct. App. 2019). “Blalock argued in the trial court that the “Stand Your Ground” amendment was not a substantive change in the law but rather was simply a “clarification” of existing law, and that therefore due process required that the effective date of the “clarification” was the date of the…”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.81.335(b)(5) — 1 case
Yoder Austin Blalock v. State of Alaska, State of Alaska v. Yoder Austin Blalock, 452 P.3d 675 (Alaska Ct. App. 2019). “Blalock argued in the trial court that the “Stand Your Ground” amendment was not a substantive change in the law but rather was simply a “clarification” of existing law, and that therefore due process required that the effective date of the “clarification” was the date of the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.