Stand-your-ground laws exist in 24 states nationwide. Such laws are also referred to as the castle doctrine. These policies are based on the common-law
doctrine that individuals have the right to protect themselves in their homes if they are under attack. Florida’s use of the stand-your-ground policy has led to
significant attention from the media and public alike.
Florida’s stand-your-ground law was the first such law in the nation that reflected an expansion of the castle doctrine. Passed in 2005 and signed into law by
Governor Jeb Bush, the stand-your-ground law only requires that the police and courts consider three basic criteria: (1) Was the individual entitled to be
present, (2) was the individual engaged in a law-abiding activity, and (3) could the individual reasonably believe that he or she was at risk for significant bodily
harm or injury? Recently, there have been several controversial perceptions of the law related to some high-profile incidents in which the offender alleged
self-defense.
One recent well-known critique of the stand-your-ground law involved the case of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. Martin was walking in his gated
neighborhood community following a trip to a local convenience store. Zimmerman, head of the neighborhood watch, contacted the police to report a
suspicious individual (Martin) walking in the neighborhood. Zimmerman followed Martin and confronted him. Zimmerman alleged that Martin attacked him.
In response, Zimmerman pulled out a gun and shot Martin, who died from his injuries.a While much was made of the stand-your-ground law, ultimately,
Zimmerman did not use this option in his case. In July 2013, Zimmerman was acquitted of second-degree murder after maintaining that he shot Martin in
self-defense.b While Zimmerman did not expressly rely on the pretrial option of the stand-your-ground law, the public perception is that the law was used to
acquit Zimmerman.
A case where stand your ground was expressly used was that of Marissa Alexander. During a confrontation with her husband in August 2010, Alexander fired
a bullet into the wall. Luckily, no one was hurt in the incident. Alexander testified that she had felt threatened. Even though Alexander used Florida’s standyour-ground law, the jury convicted her of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and she was sentenced to 20 years in prison because her actions
triggered a mandatory minimum gun law.c Her case was overturned on appeal, and in January 2015, she pled guilty to aggravated assault. She was
sentenced to three years and received credit for the time she had already served.d She was also sentenced to two years of house arrest, which she
successfully completed in 2017. After Alexander’s release, she created a nonprofit organization that focuses on issues of social justice, criminal justice
reform, and domestic violence.e
While several groups have called for the repeal of the stand-your-ground law in Florida, state legislators are working on reforms to the rule. One proposal
currently under consideration would shift the burden of proof for the pretrial hearing to the prosecutor. The proposed changes articulate that the stand-yourground law “is not intended to encourage vigilantism or acts of revenge, authorize the initiation of a confrontation as a pretext to respond with deadly force,
or negate a duty to retreat for persons engaged in unlawful mutual combat.”f While high-profile cases have drawn a disproportionate amount of attention to
this issue (and in many instances, attention based on incorrect facts about the law), it remains to be seen what changes the legislature will make to the law.
Critical Thinking Questions
What challenges exist with stand-your-ground laws?
Given these examples, what recommendations for reform should states consider with regard to stand-your-ground laws?
What are the benefits and consequences of the use of police discretion?
What suggestions would you offer to prevent abuse and misconduct that can occur under the umbrella of police discretion?
In your opinion, what factors are most likely to influence involvement in crime by second- and third-generation immigrants? Is there anything unique about
American culture that would increase criminality across immigrant generations?
Why do you think the general public continues to believe that immigration causes crime despite evidence to suggest the opposite?
What are some possible ways to help reduce criminal involvement among second- and third-generation immigrants?