This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

People v. Chen

Ruling by

Michael J. Raphael

Lower Court

Riverside County Superior Court

Lower Court Judge

James S. Hawkins

concurring Judge(s)

Carol Codrington

In order for use of deadly force to be justified as defense, intrusion must threaten death or serious bodily harm.





Court

California Courts of Appeal 4DCA/2

Cite as

2020 DJDAR 6034

Published

Jun. 22, 2020

Filing Date

Jun. 18, 2020

Opinion Type

Opinion

Disposition Type

Affirmed

Summary

Yi Chih Chen called the Riverside County Sheriff's Department for assistance with a neighbor dispute. Deputy Sheriff Christina Weber arrived at Chen's home. Chen asked that she stop his neighbors from taking down a shared fence that day. The neighbors, a married couple, sought to replace the fence and had hired contractors, but Chen objected to the plan. Weber explained to everyone that it was "a civil issue" and they should take the matter up in civil court. The fencing company hired by the neighbors arrived at around this time. Weber left but was sent back to the scene because Chen went upstairs to his bedroom and began pointing a shotgun from his window toward the neighbors and two of the contractors. Chen was charged with four counts of assault with a firearm, a felony, and one count of brandishing a firearm, a misdemeanor. The jury acquitted Chen on the assault charges and convicted him on the misdemeanor. Chen was granted summary probation for 36 months and allowed to serve, via an ankle monitor, the three months of mandatory jail time. Chen appealed, contending the court erred in excluding evidence about the neighbors' alleged failure to comply with the homeowners association rules because the violation would have shown he was defending his property.

Affirmed. Even in defending against someone committing a felony, where the "character of the crime, and the manner of its perpetration" "do not reasonably create a fear of great bodily harm," "there is no cause for exaction of a human life, or for the use of deadly force." People v. Ceballos. The present case was not a situation involving a home invasion, nor even a defense against some other crime potentially involving death or serious bodily harm. Nothing in the record indicated that the neighbors forcibly entered Chen's home or that they committed any felonies much less any that threatened death or serious bodily harm. Instead, the neighbors simply sought to remove and replace a shared fence. Accordingly, whether or not the neighbors complied with homeowners association rules or the Civil Code, Chen was not legally justified in brandishing a deadly firearm.

— Carlo Nardone


#275472

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424