563.046. Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest. — 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he or she reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, a law enforcement officer is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he or she reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.
2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful, and the amount of physical force used was objectively reasonable in light of the totality of the particular facts and circumstances confronting the officer on the scene, without regard to the officer's underlying intent or motivation.
3. In effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody, a law enforcement officer is justified in using deadly force only:
(1) When deadly force is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When the officer reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or prevent an escape from custody and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested:
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony offense involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical injury; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury to the officer or others unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case:
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985).
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985).
· cites it 2× “1984); Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.046 (1979); Nev. Rev.”
State v. Beck, 167 S.W.3d 767 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “itial aggressor; except that in such case his use of force is nevertheless justifiable provided (a) He has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened…”
State v. Massa, 410 S.W.3d 645 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 3× “Defendant asserts that Instruction Number 10, submitting self-defense, should have been included in Instruction Number 11, which submitted the defense of law enforcement officer justification under section 563.046, RSMo 2000, and Instruction Number 11 did not properly submit…”
State v. Mangum, 390 S.W.3d 853 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “t that in such case his or her use of force is nevertheless justifiable provided: (a) He or she has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened use of…”
State v. Fincher, 655 S.W.2d 54 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “itial aggressor; except that in such case his use of force is nevertheless justifiable provided (a) He has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened…”
State v. Abdul-Khaliq, 39 S.W.3d 880 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “itial aggressor; except that in such case his use of force is nevertheless justifiable provided (a) He has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened…”
State of Missouri v. Eric J. Devalkenaere (Mo. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 45× “the initial aggressor, then such person is only justified in using such force if: (a) He or she has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened use of…”
Davis v. Moore, 553 S.W.2d 559 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977).
“60, The Criminal Code of Missouri, effective January 1, 1979, § 563.046. The opinion only deals with trial errors of parading before the jury the “litany of unproved arrests .”
State of Missouri v. Samuel Jerry Whitaker (Mo. 2022).
· cites it 2× “t that in such case his or her use of force is nevertheless justifiable provided: (a) He or she has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened use of…”
Jones v. City of St. Louis, 92 F. Supp. 2d 949 (E.D. Mo. 2000).
· cites it 4× “See Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 563.046(3) (a law enforcement officer may use deadly force if he reasonably believes that person "[m]ay otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay").”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.046(3) — 1 case
Jones v. City of St. Louis, 92 F. Supp. 2d 949 (E.D. Mo. 2000).
“See Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 563.046(3) (a law enforcement officer may use deadly force if he reasonably believes that person "[m]ay otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay").”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.046(4) — 1 case
Jones v. City of St. Louis, 92 F. Supp. 2d 949 (E.D. Mo. 2000).
“See Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 563.046(3) (a law enforcement officer may use deadly force if he reasonably believes that person "[m]ay otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay").”
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.