(TX) Car's owner fatally shoots alleged burglar

[Drizzt]

Car's owner fatally shoots alleged burglar

A southwest Houston man trying to hold a car burglar at gunpoint until police arrived killed the suspect Thursday when the man lunged at him, police said.

Donell Rashun Moten, 24, of the 8500 block of Hearth was killed by a shotgun blast in the neck about 3 a.m. at the West Hollow Apartments, 1001 Fondren, investigators said. The case will be presented to a Harris County grand jury without charges.

The shooting happened after a resident, whose name was not disclosed, found Moten and a companion burglarizing his car, police said. While his girlfriend called police, the man grabbed a shotgun and detained Moten, although the accomplice fled in a small, white car.

After the accomplice returned and stopped nearby, police said, Moten began "talking aggressively" and lunged at the owner, who fired once. The accomplice drove away, officers said.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/1613023

OK, lunge at the guy with the gun..... real smart!

 

[Tamara]

...Moten began "talking aggressively" and lunged at the owner, who fired once.

There's a Natural Selection Opportunity for ya... Hopefully the homeowner won't get crucified, although I question the wisdom of attempting to detain the dude.

 

[SkySlash]

Texas Penal Code has a statute, I believe offhand it is in Chapter 9 of the Penal Code that states the production of a weapon with the threat to use deadly force does not constitute the actual use of deadly force if the intent is to detain the person until he can be taken into custody.

That is what he was doing which is legal, when the guy lunged at him, it tossed him forward into the protection of justified use of deadly force under the Self-Defense scenario.

It is reasonable to believe that losing control of the shotgun would have ended in his death, and that is reasonable cause for most anyone to shoot the attacker.

Good show on the part of the shooter, I have no doubt the case will end at the Grand Jury level. The guy won't win a civil suit either, not in this state, and certainly not based on those facts, if they are indeed the facts.

-SS

 

[David Scott]

I lived in Texas for 20 years. I recall similar cases, and unless they guy gets stuck with a crusading anti for a DA (and tehre aren't many of them in Texas), I predict he'll be ruled justified.

 

[Southla1]

It's just about the same way this side of the Sabine River too until you get to New Orleans. Rural and semi rural areas here in Louisiana he will walk..................GOOD.

 

[Jhp147]

auto burglary

Auto burglary has become quite prevalent in Texas. I believe that it was in 1994, under Ma Richards rule, that it was reduced from a felony to a class A misdemeanor.
A few years ago in my city, an apartment dweller heard noises, looked out his window, and saw auto burglars at work on his or other cars in the lot. He fetched his 9mm and went down to confront them. The auto burglar...a gang banger with a history...was not aware of the common knowledge that "auto burglary is a property crime, not a crime of violence, we can't put people in PRISON for it" rule. He had armed himself, and fired on the 9mm toting owner. He missed. The car owner's 9mm reply was successful in ending this auto burglar's career. Moral: In Texas, if you leave something in a car, it WILL be stolen...and auto burglary can be dangerous to all involved.

 

[Steel]

§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
§ 9.43. Protection of Third Person's Property
A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent, or child, resides with

 

[answerguy]

In Michigan there is no such thing as car theft. Here we call it "unlawfully driving away a vehicle". Almost sounds nice.
Next I expect murder to become "converted victim to room temperature".

 

[ahenry]

Personally (and I realize this might be an unpopular view for some) I’d like to see auto theft become a far more severe crime. I’d like to it to go back to the sort of offense horse theft was in the “old west”. Loosing ones vehicle can become a major problem for the victim.

 

[Southla1]

Ahenry it ain't an unpopular view to me.................I fully agree with you. I think a car thief should be hung, and a car owner allowed to shoot them if caught in the act..................believe me not many would be shot or hung...............the word would spread......that occupation would become very rare!