Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 278, § 8A (2026)

Killing or injuring a person unlawfully in a dwelling; defense

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 8A. In the prosecution of a person who is an occupant of a dwelling charged with killing or injuring one who was unlawfully in said dwelling, it shall be a defense that the occupant was in his dwelling at the time of the offense and that he acted in the reasonable belief that the person unlawfully in said dwelling was about to inflict great bodily injury or death upon said occupant or upon another person lawfully in said dwelling, and that said occupant used reasonable means to defend himself or such other person lawfully in said dwelling. There shall be no duty on said occupant to retreat from such person unlawfully in said dwelling.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 33 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Peloquin, 770 N.E.2d 440 (Mass. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Peloquin, 770 N.E.2d 440 (Mass. 2002). · cites it 6× “The motion asserted that the defendant’s trial counsel had provided him with ineffective representation by failing to request a jury instruction on the so-called “castle” law, G. L. c. 278, § 8A. The defendant also contended that the failure to raise the *205 issue on direct…”

Commonwealth v. Carlino, 865 N.E.2d 767 (Mass. 2007). · cites it 3× “At both trials, the judge did not instruct concerning the “castle” law, G. L. c. 278, § 8A. 4 The defendant appeals, arguing that (1) he is entitled to a third trial because the judge should have given an instruction on the castle law; and (2) given the prohibition against…”

Commonwealth v. McKinnon, 843 N.E.2d 1020 (Mass. 2006). · cites it 7× “We transferred this case to this court on our own motion to decide whether the word “dwelling” in the “castle law” statute, G. L. c. 278, § 8A, should be extended to encompass an open porch and outside stairs of a house.”

State v. Harden, 679 S.E.2d 628 (W. Va. 2009). · cites it 2× “See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 278, § 8A (1998); N.J.”

Commonwealth v. Carlino, 429 Mass. 692 (Mass. 1999). · cites it 2× “(d) The defendant is not entitled to a jury instruction under G. L. c. 278, § 8A, the so-called “castle” law, which relieves a defendant from the duty to retreat when attacked in his or her own home.”

Commonwealth v. Gregory, 461 N.E.2d 831 (Mass. App. Ct. 1984). · cites it 3× “The defendant claims that the judge’s charge on self-defense incorrectly implied, contrary to the recently enacted so-called “castle” law (G. L. c. 278, § 8A), that the defendant had a duty to retreat from an assailant while in his own home.”

Commonwealth v. Doucette, 462 N.E.2d 1084 (Mass. 1984). “Although the Legislature modified part of the rule in *454 the Shaffer case, see G. L. c. 278, § 8A, inserted by St. 1981, c.”

Commonwealth v. Lapointe, 522 N.E.2d 937 (Mass. 1988). · cites it 2× “” The defendant asserts that the *329 Legislature, in enacting G. L. c. 278, § 8A, 6 from which the judge drew the instructions on duty to retreat, intended to permit a person to respond to a life-threatening assault from a lawful visitor in one’s home.”

Commonwealth v. Albert, 466 N.E.2d 78 (Mass. 1984). “The defendant additionally contends that the judge employed an incorrect definition of “dwelling” in explaining the applica *862 bility of G. L. c. 278, § 8A. 6 The judge instructed the jury in accordance with that statute.”

Commonwealth v. Scalise, 439 N.E.2d 818 (Mass. 1982). “Compare G. L. c. 278, § 8A, inserted by St. 1981, c.”

Commonwealth v. Santos, 912 N.E.2d 985 (Mass. 2009). “G. L. c. 278, § 8A. The court correctly observes that the jury were entitled to “pick and *788 choose among conflicting versions, accepting or rejecting all or portions of the testimony as they see fit.”

Commonwealth v. Vives, 854 N.E.2d 1241 (Mass. 2006). “Regardless, the Commonwealth did not object to the instruction as given. The defendant’s duty to retreat was not altered by the fact that the incident occurred inside his apartment building because the common stairway outside the defendant’s apartment was not part of his…”

Show all 33 citing cases →

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.