State v. Gasser
275 So.3d 976 (2019)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The aggressor doctrine, which precludes a person who initiates or provokes a conflict from claiming self-defense, applies to all forms of justifiable homicide under Louisiana law, including the 'shoot-the-intruder' defense for motor vehicles. Even when this defense is invoked, the use of deadly force must be a reasonable and proportional response to the threat presented.
Facts:
- On December 1, 2016, Ronald Gasser and Joseph McKnight were involved in a prolonged road rage incident that began on the Crescent City Connection.
- The encounter involved both drivers engaging in mutually antagonistic behavior, including speeding, aggressive lane changes, cursing, and making hand gestures at one another.
- The two vehicles eventually stopped side-by-side at a red light at the intersection of Behrman Highway and Holmes Boulevard.
- McKnight exited his SUV, approached the open passenger-side window of Gasser's car, and leaned on it while the two men continued to argue.
- While McKnight, who was unarmed, was at the window, Gasser, who remained seated in his vehicle, fired his gun three times, fatally wounding McKnight.
- Forensic evidence indicated McKnight's hand was on or near the edge of the car door when shot and that the shots were fired from a distance of approximately three feet, not at close or contact range as would be expected if McKnight were lunging into the vehicle.
Procedural Posture:
- A Jefferson Parish Grand Jury indicted Ronald Gasser for the second degree murder of Joseph McKnight.
- Gasser pled not guilty in the trial court.
- Following a jury trial, Gasser was found guilty of the lesser included offense of manslaughter by a 10-2 verdict on January 26, 2018.
- The trial court sentenced Gasser to thirty years of imprisonment at hard labor.
- Gasser's motion to reconsider his sentence was denied by the trial court.
- Gasser (appellant) appealed his conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit (the intermediate appellate court).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the 'aggressor doctrine' preclude a defendant from claiming justifiable homicide under Louisiana's 'shoot-the-intruder' law, and was the evidence sufficient for a jury to find that the defendant's use of deadly force was unreasonable under the circumstances?
Opinions:
Majority - Chaisson, J.
Yes, the aggressor doctrine applies, and the evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant's use of force was unreasonable. A defendant who is an aggressor or who mutually engages in a conflict cannot claim justifiable homicide unless he first withdraws in good faith. The court held that the aggressor doctrine applies to all provisions of Louisiana's justifiable homicide statute, including the 'shoot-the-intruder' defense codified in La. R.S. 14:20(A)(4)(a), reasoning that the legislature did not intend to allow an aggressor to provoke a confrontation and then hide behind the defense. Furthermore, even if Gasser were not the aggressor, the State presented sufficient evidence to prove his use of deadly force was unreasonable. The statutory presumption that deadly force is reasonable against an intruder applies only to a forcible entry, which did not occur here. Even if the presumption applied, it is rebuttable, and the State successfully rebutted it by showing that Gasser's response of shooting an unarmed man who was leaning on his open window was grossly disproportionate to the threat posed.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the scope of Louisiana's 'stand your ground' and 'castle doctrine' defenses as they apply to motor vehicles. By holding that the aggressor doctrine limits the 'shoot-the-intruder' defense, the court prevents individuals who initiate or willingly participate in escalating conflicts, like road rage, from claiming justification for using deadly force. The ruling reinforces the bedrock principle of proportionality in self-defense, establishing that even when a technical 'unlawful entry' into a vehicle occurs, the response must be reasonable to the actual threat. This precedent will likely temper the application of 'shoot-the-intruder' defenses in cases where the defendant was not an innocent party prior to the final confrontation.
Unlock the full brief for State v. Gasser