Syfert Injury Law Firm
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448A person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, relating to the use of force in defense of self or others, Code Section 16-3-23, relating to the use of force in defense of a habitation, or Code Section 16-3-24, relating to the use of force in defense of property other than a habitation, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use force as provided in said Code sections, including deadly force.
(Code 1981, §16-3-23.1, enacted by Ga. L. 2006, p. 477, § 1/SB 396.)
- Trial court committed reversible error in failing to charge the jury on the lack of a duty to retreat under O.C.G.A. § 16-3-23.1 because self-defense, O.C.G.A. § 16-3-21(a), was the defendant's sole defense, and the issue of retreat was squarely placed in issue by the prosecutor's cross-examination of the defendant, by the defendant's explanation of why the defendant did not drive away from the victim, whom the defendant characterized as the aggressor, and by the prosecutor's closing argument; the evidence of the defendant's guilt was not overwhelming, given that the case turned solely on the credibility of the defendant, the victim, and the other witnesses. Hill v. State, 310 Ga. App. 695, 713 S.E.2d 891 (2011).
- Under a plain error analysis in the defendant's trial for murder, the trial court did not err when the court failed to charge the jury that one acting in defense of self has no duty to retreat because the jury charges given in the case fairly informed the jury as to the law of self-defense and the defendant failed to affirmatively show that the failure to charge on the duty to retreat probably affected the outcome of the trial. Shaw v. State, 292 Ga. 871, 742 S.E.2d 707 (2013).
Cited in Webb v. State, 284 Ga. 122, 663 S.E.2d 690 (2008).
- Construction and application of "make my day" and "stand your ground" statutes, 76 A.L.R.6th 1.
Total Results: 20
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-10-15
Snippet: habitation only in three circumstances. See OCGA § 16-3-23 (1)-(3). Appellant relies on the third circumstance
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-08-13
Snippet: accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, 16-3-23, 16-3-23.1, or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-05-29
Snippet: the law, see OCGA §§ 16-3-20 (1); 16-3-21 (a); 16-3-23.1, and, given the evidence presented, the trial
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2024-02-06
Snippet: assault or offer of personal violence[.] OCGA § 16-3-23 (1). However, “[w]here there is no evidence that
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2023-10-11
Snippet: himself or herself or a third person”)14; OCGA § 16-3-23.1 (providing that a person who used force “in defense
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2023-08-21
Snippet: and use force” as authorized by law. OCGA § 16- 3-23.1. And when a defendant sufficiently raises a justification
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2023-08-21
Snippet: using deadly force in self-defense. See OCGA § 16-3-23.1.5 Because he did not object to the trial court’s
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2023-04-18
Snippet: accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, 16-3-23, 16-3-23.1, or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2022-06-01
Snippet: Code section[], including deadly force. OCGA § 16-3-23.1. With regard to the timing of Gude’s motion
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2022-01-04
Snippet: instead of defense of habitation under OCGA § 16-3-23 (1). See Benham, 277 Ga. at 517. There, we determined
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-12-14
Snippet: instead of defense of habitation under OCGA § 16-3-23 (1). See Benham, 277 Ga. at 517. There, we determined
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-07-07
Snippet: § 16-3-21], including deadly force.” OCGA § 16-3-23.1. If his use of force falls within these parameters
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2021-05-17
Snippet: SE2d 909) (2009); see also OCGA §§ 16-3-21, 16-3-23.1; Rammage v. State, 307 Ga. 763, 766-767 (2) (838
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-06-10
Citation: 829 S.E.2d 333
Snippet: accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, 16-3-23, 16-3-23.1, or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal prosecution
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2019-06-10
Citation: 829 S.E.2d 312
Snippet: jury charge on defense of habitation. See OCGA § 16-3-23 (1) & (3).2 We agree. The evidence presented at
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-09-10
Citation: 819 S.E.2d 44, 304 Ga. 400
Snippet: the manner set forth in OCGA § 16-3-23 (1) or (3).5 See OCGA § 16-3-23.1.6 Even assuming the evidence showed
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2018-02-19
Citation: 810 S.E.2d 527
Snippet: accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, 16-3-23, 16-3-23.1, or 16-3-24 shall be immune from criminal prosecution
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-09-13
Citation: 302 Ga. 129, 805 S.E.2d 94, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 774
Snippet: retreated before shooting Osborne. But OCGA § 16-3-23.1 clearly provides that a person who is authorized
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-08-28
Citation: 301 Ga. 794, 804 S.E.2d 427
Snippet: another’s imminent use of unlawful force. See OCGA § 16-3-23.1. In other words, the law “[does] not require S
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2017-06-19
Citation: 301 Ga. 482, 801 S.E.2d 804, 2017 WL 2623875, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 534
Snippet: prevent the commission of the felony. OCGA § 16-3-23 (1), (3). Thus, among other things, for defense