Self Defense? Weapons, Guns, Firearms

Forgive a rookie for floundering around, but the way I read that paragraph, the buyer would need to buying with the intent to distribute. Different from buying for personal use.

 

This sound a lot like a case here in Louisiana that went down in Clinton, LA.
Since I don't have the the required 10 post I can't post the link to the Open Carry forum that's in.

 

**** tisk tisk ***

You were working off of what you heard? Andy, don't you mean from what YOU DID???? You ARE the shooter!!!!

Don't come on here and try to b.s. these guys.

Here is the WHOLE story...

Clinton drug deal leaves man dead; three arrested.
Looks like a drug deal the story says "An apparent drug deal went sour Friday night in Clinton.

Seem like Matthew and Barnes were at Matthew's residence Friday about 11pm when Anthony Manzella and Andrew Robertson both of Hammond arrived for an apparent drug deal.
As Manzella and Robertson entered the residence Matthew pulled out an AK-47 assault rifle and struck Manzella on the back of the head with the butt of the gun, Dunn said (Dunn is from Clinton PD) Manzella responded by shooting Matthew once with a .40 cal. Glock and Matthew died within minutes.

After the shooting the three men ran out in the street and Barnes approached a Clinton police officer who just happened to be patrolling the street at that moment Dunn said.
The LEO stopped all three and arrested them CPD recovered the glock and one shell casing from the glock and the AK.
Manzella's head wound was treated by Acadian at the scene.

The are questioning one other person who may have been involved.

the booked Johnny Barnes 27, 3302 Quiet Lane, Jackson, Anthony Manzella, 19, 52423 Piazza Rd. Hammond and Andrew Robertson, 23 14568 Kohnke Hill Rd. Hammond.


So the real question remains...

Andy, are you asking this from prison?

 

This is kinda old already, but after a quick glance one thing catches my attention.
The statute provides the exception for cases involving a "controlled dangerous substance".
In this case there are two problems.
First, there was no controlled substance recovered as evidence.
Second, the supposed substance is marijuana, which typically is not considered a "controlled substance" like cocaine or methamphetamine. There should be a statute within the state law that defines what a controlled substance is within that jurisdiction.

 

We are talking Louisiana here. Marijuana is a CDS here Sch. 1. In this story the two guys went there to buy a Sch. 1 drug. Just because there were no drugs found (at least in his side of the story) doesn't mean the intent wasn't there.

Louisiana RS 14:30

§30. First degree murder

A. First degree murder is the killing of a human being:

(1) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated kidnapping, second degree kidnapping, aggravated escape, aggravated arson, aggravated rape, forcible rape, aggravated burglary, armed robbery, assault by drive-by shooting, first degree robbery, second degree robbery, simple robbery, terrorism, cruelty to juveniles, or second degree cruelty to juveniles.

(2) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon a fireman, peace officer, or civilian employee of the Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory or any other forensic laboratory engaged in the performance of his lawful duties, or when the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm is directly related to the victim's status as a fireman, peace officer, or civilian employee.

(3) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon more than one person.

(4) When the offender has specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm and has offered, has been offered, has given, or has received anything of value for the killing.

(5) When the offender has the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon a victim who is under the age of twelve or sixty-five years of age or older.

(6) When the offender has the specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm while engaged in the distribution, exchange, sale, or purchase, or any attempt thereof, of a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I, II, III, IV, or V of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.

(7) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and is engaged in the activities prohibited by R.S. 14:107.1(C)(1).

(8) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and there has been issued by a judge or magistrate any lawful order prohibiting contact between the offender and the victim in response to threats of physical violence or harm which was served on the offender and is in effect at the time of the homicide.

(9) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm upon a victim who was a witness to a crime or was a member of the immediate family of a witness to a crime committed on a prior occasion and:

(a) The killing was committed for the purpose of preventing or influencing the victim's testimony in any criminal action or proceeding whether or not such action or proceeding had been commenced; or

(b) The killing was committed for the purpose of exacting retribution for the victim's prior testimony.

(10) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm and the offender has previously acted with a specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm that resulted in the killing of one or more persons.

B.(1) For the purposes of Paragraph (A)(2) of this Section, the term "peace officer" means any peace officer, as defined in R.S. 40:2402, and includes any constable, marshal, deputy marshal, sheriff, deputy sheriff, local or state policeman, commissioned wildlife enforcement agent, federal law enforcement officer, jail or prison guard, parole officer, probation officer, judge, attorney general, assistant attorney general, attorney general's investigator, district attorney, assistant district attorney, or district attorney's investigator.

(2) For the purposes of Paragraph (A)(9) of this Section, the term "member of the immediate family" means a husband, wife, father, mother, daughter, son, brother, sister, stepparent, grandparent, stepchild, or grandchild.

(3) For the purposes of Paragraph (A)(9) of this Section, the term "witness" means any person who has testified or is expected to testify for the prosecution, or who, by reason of having relevant information, is subject to call or likely to be called as a witness for the prosecution, whether or not any action or proceeding has yet commenced.

C. Penalty provisions.

(1) If the district attorney seeks a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by death or life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, in accordance with the determination of the jury. The provisions of C.Cr.P. Art 782 relative to cases in which punishment may be capital shall apply.

(2) If the district attorney does not seek a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. The provisions of C.Cr.P. Art 782 relative to cases in which punishment is necessarily confinement at hard labor shall apply.

Amended by Acts 1973, No. 109, §1; Acts 1975, No. 327, §1; Acts 1976, No. 657, §1; Acts 1979, No. 74, §1, eff. June 29, 1979; Acts 1985, No. 515, §1; Acts 1987, No. 654, §1; Acts 1987, No. 862, §1; Acts 1988, No. 779, §2, eff. July 18, 1988; Acts 1989, No. 373, §1; Acts 1989, No. 637, §2; Acts 1990, No. 526, §1; Acts 1992, No. 296, §1; Acts 1993, No. 244, §1; Acts 1993, No. 496, §1; Acts 1999, No. 579, §1; Acts 1999, No. 1359, §1; Acts 2001, No. 1056, §1; Acts 2002, 1st Ex. Sess., No. 128, §2; Acts 2003, No. 1223, §1; Acts 2004, No. 145, §1; Acts 2004, No. 649, §1; Acts 2006, No. 53, §1; Acts 2007, No. 125, §1; Acts 2009, No. 79, §1, eff. June 18, 2009.

 

Illegal carrying.

Unfortunately this is a real world situation and a real person is looking at real hard time, not to mention having to live with the fact that he shot and killed a person.

In my opinion, the 1st degree charge is justified. Also, Illegal Carrying carries 5 to 10.

There is a reason people try to rob drug dealers and buyers: they generally have lotsa cash and generally do not call the cops to report the robbery.

If the facts as presented are true then a robbery occurred, but the law is pretty clear that if you go to a drug deal then you forfeit your right to claim self defense.

Any chance to plea to 2nd degree or manslaughter? It might save a trial and some hard time.

 

Bummer. Sounds like for many people that would be a good reason to live somewhere else

Anyway- even if it wasn't considered a controlled substance there would be other charges to stick him with.

 

And we would be glad if the doppers moved some place else.