Defending Yourself and Others in Louisiana: When You Can Use Force
An altercation can erupt unexpectedly at a bar, in your home, or even while driving. In those moments, many people wonder: Do I have a legal right to defend myself or someone else? Louisiana law provides several statutes addressing the use of force and deadly force. This article explains the rules, the differences between self‑
defense and defense of others, and key court decisions shaping these laws. It’s tailored for individuals and families seeking clear information about protecting themselves without crossing legal lines. For personalized representation, The Ambeau Law Firm stands ready with extensive experience in violent‑crime defense.
Understanding the Legal Categories
Louisiana recognizes different types of force in defensive situations: non‑
deadly force, deadly force, and force used on behalf of another person. The relevant statutes are:
- La. R.S. 14:19 (“use of force or violence in defense”) – governs non‑deadly force.
- La. R.S. 14:20 (“justifiable homicide”) – governs the use of deadly force.
- La. R.S. 14:22 (“defense of others”) – governs force used to protect someone else.
- La. R.S. 14:21 (“aggressor cannot claim self‑defense”) – limits the defense for those who start the fight.
Non‑Deadly Force (R.S. 14:19)
R.S. 14:19 allows the use of force or violence when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against you or a forcible offense or trespass against property. The force must be both reasonable and apparently necessary.
Key points:
- Purpose: The goal must be prevention of a forcible offense (e.g., assault, robbery) or trespass.
- Proportionality: The level of force must be reasonable. Pulling a gun on someone wielding garden shears may be disproportionate.
- No homicide: If you’re defensive actions cause someone’s death, R.S. 14:19 no longer applies; the situation falls under justifiable homicide.
- Stand‑your‑ground: You have no duty to retreat if you are lawfully present and not engaged in unlawful activity. Jurors cannot consider the possibility of retreat when deciding if your force was reasonable.
Deadly Force and Justifiable Homicide (R.S. 14:20)
R.S. 14:20 lays out four situations where killing another person is justifiable:
- Self‑defense: You reasonably believe you are in imminent danger of losing your life or suffering great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save yourself.
- Preventing violent felonies: You reasonably believe that a violent or forcible felony (e.g., rape, armed robbery) is about to occur and the killing is necessary to prevent it.
- Protection of persons in a dwelling, business, or vehicle: You reasonably believe the person killed is likely to use unlawful force against someone in a dwelling, business or vehicle.
- Castle doctrine – shoot‑the‑intruder: You are lawfully inside a home, business or vehicle and kill someone attempting to unlawfully enter or who has entered; you reasonably believe deadly force is necessary. This defense is not available if you are engaged in drug trafficking.
Additional features:
- Presumption of reasonableness: The law presumes you had a reasonable belief that deadly force was necessary if an intruder unlawfully and forcibly entered your home or vehicle.
- No duty to retreat: You may stand your ground and meet force with force.
- Burden of proof: Once you raise self‑defense in a homicide case, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was not justified.
Defense of Others (R.S. 14:22)
Louisiana law allows you to step in to protect someone else if two conditions are met:
- It is reasonably apparent that the person being attacked could have justifiably used force to defend themselves.
- You reasonably believe your intervention is necessary to protect that person.
Thus, you may fight back or even use deadly force on behalf of a family member or stranger if you reasonably believe they face imminent danger and could have lawfully defended themselves.
The Aggressor Doctrine (R.S. 14:21)
Under R.S. 14:21, a person who initiates a conflict cannot claim self‑defense unless they withdraw in good faith and clearly communicate their intent to stop fighting. The aggressor doctrine applies to all forms of justifiable homicide and prevents someone from provoking a fight and then claiming legal justification for the outcome.
Judicial Guidance: How Courts Apply These Laws
Objective and Subjective Requirements
In State v. Freeman, the Louisiana Supreme Court explained that non‑
homicide self‑
defense involves both an objective and subjective inquiry. The force used must be objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and the defender must subjectively believe it was necessary. In homicide cases, the inquiry is primarily objective—whether the defendant’s belief in imminent danger and necessity of killing was reasonable.
Burden of Proof and Presumption of Innocence
In homicide cases, once the defendant raises self‑
defense, the burden shifts to the state. It must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the homicide was not justified. By contrast, in non‑
homicide cases the defense of self‑defense is considered an affirmative defense, and courts have suggested the defendant must prove it by a preponderance of the evidence.
The Castle Doctrine and Stand‑Your‑Ground
Louisiana’s castle doctrine (R.S. 14:20(A)(4)) provides a powerful defense when an intruder unlawfully enters your home, business or vehicle. The presumption that you reasonably believed deadly force was necessary applies if (1) the intruder was forcibly entering and (2) you knew or had reason to believe an unlawful entry was occurring.
Despite this, courts caution that the defense is not automatic. In State v. Gasser, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal emphasized that the aggressor doctrine still applies and that justifiable homicide claims are “not unqualified”. The court rejected the argument that the castle doctrine eliminates the aggressor doctrine, noting the legislature did not intend to allow someone to provoke a conflict and then hide behind the castle‑doctrine shield.
Importance of Proportionality: State v. Patterson
The case State v. Patterson involved a defendant who shot and killed a man chasing him with a knife. The court noted that to justify homicide, the defendant must “reasonably believe” he is in imminent danger and that the killing is necessary. The possibility of retreat may be considered when evaluating the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief, although statutory amendments now remove any duty to retreat for those lawfully present.
Patterson also illustrates the concept of proportionality the defendant used a shotgun against a man with a knife; the jury could decide that deadly force was not necessary. Even today, with no duty to retreat, juries still examine whether the fear and force were reasonable.
Practical Guidance for Using Force or Deadly Force
When Can You Defend Yourself?
- You must be facing a forcible offense (e.g., assault, rape) or trespass. Verbal insults alone do not justify violence.
- Assess proportionality. Use only the force reasonably necessary to stop the threat. If your attacker is unarmed, using a firearm may be deemed excessive.
- Stand your ground, but think before acting. You do not have to retreat when lawfully present, yet the reasonableness of your response will be scrutinized.
- Avoid being the aggressor. Starting a fight forecloses self‑defense unless you withdraw in good faith.
When Can You Defend Others?
- Reasonable appearance. It must appear that the person you are defending has a legal right to defend themselves. Jumping into a dispute where you misinterpret who is the aggressor could negate the defense.
- Necessity. Your intervention should be reasonably believed necessary to protect the other person.
- Proportionality and aggressor doctrine apply. If you become the aggressor or use disproportionate force, the defense may fail.
Interplay with Other Defenses
- Intoxication: Voluntary intoxication is generally not a defense to crimes of general intent and does not automatically negate self‑defense.
- Defense of property: R.S. 14:19 covers defending property through non‑deadly force. The castle doctrine deals with defending a dwelling, business or vehicle.
- Law enforcement presence: If officers are on scene, using force may be deemed unnecessary. In Freeman, the defendant shot while a police officer was intervening, undermining her claim of necessity.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Can I use force if someone slaps me?
It depends on whether the slap constitutes a forcible offense. Generally, a minor slap is simple battery and may not justify significant force. The response must be reasonable and apparently necessary. Courts often look at factors such as size, strength, prior threats and whether the aggressor escalated the assault.
What is a “forcible offense”?
A forcible offense is one that involves the use or threatened use of force or violence. Examples include assault, battery, robbery, rape and other crimes that threaten personal safety. Trespass against property can also count when you are lawfully in possession of the property.
If I shoot a burglar entering my home, do I have to prove I was afraid?
The presumption under R.S. 14:20(B) is that you reasonably believed deadly force was necessary to prevent the unlawful entry. However, prosecutors may present evidence to rebut this presumption (e.g., if you invited the person in or were engaged in illegal activity).
Can I defend someone who starts a fight?
You may defend another only when it is reasonably apparent the person attacked could have justifiably used force. If the person you aid is the aggressor, your defense of others claim may fail.
What if I was the aggressor but tried to leave?
Under R.S. 14:21, an aggressor who initiates a conflict may claim self‑defense only if they withdraw in good faith and clearly communicate the withdrawal. Without such withdrawal, the defense is barred, as illustrated in Gasser.
How do juries evaluate “reasonableness”?
Juries consider the totality of circumstances size and age differences, the presence of weapons, prior threats, whether a police officer was present (as in Freeman), and whether retreat was possible (though retreat is not required).
Does the law differ when defending property versus persons?
Yes. Non‑deadly force may be used to prevent trespass or property offenses. Deadly force is justified only to prevent violent felonies or protect persons in a dwelling, business or vehicle. It is not justified solely to protect property.
Are there any exclusion to the castle doctrine?
Yes. The shoot‑the‑intruder defense does not apply if the person using force is engaged in acquiring, distributing or possessing illegal drugs.
What should I do after a self‑defense incident?
Contact law enforcement immediately and seek counsel. Do not make detailed statements without an attorney. Evidence may include surveillance, witness testimony and forensic data. A skilled attorney can help preserve exculpatory evidence and present your justification effectively.
The Ambeau Law Firm: Skilled Defense in Self‑Defense Cases
When you use force or deadly force, the criminal justice system scrutinizes your actions. The Ambeau Law Firm has extensive experience defending clients in self‑defense cases, including homicides. Jarrett Ambeau, founder of the firm, has tried over 50 felony jury trials and has more than 14 years of experience. His military service in the U.S. Army JAG Corps and experience as a prosecutor and defense attorney give him insight into how prosecutors approach these cases.
Jarrett Ambeau holds a Master of Science in Forensic DNA and Serology and is a courtqualified expert in forensic DNA interpretation. He uses this expertise to challenge forensic evidence often present in self‑defense cases such as gunshot residue, blood spatter, and DNA. The firm’s approach includes:
- Case investigation: Reconstructing the incident through witness interviews, scene visits and forensic analysis.
- Legal research: Identifying the appropriate justification statute and ensuring the jury receives proper instructions.
- Motion practice: Filing motions to suppress illegally obtained evidence and to introduce evidence supporting the defense.
- Trial advocacy: Presenting a compelling narrative that demonstrates the reasonableness of the defendant’s actions.
Clients benefit from The Ambeau Law Firm’s reputation for thoroughness and commitment to justice. The firm aims to provide clarity and strategic advice so clients understand their rights and options.
Conclusion
Defending yourself or another in Louisiana requires careful adherence to statutory rules. Non‑deadly force is permitted under R.S. 14:19 when reasonable and necessary. Deadly force may be justifiable under R.S. 14:20 in situations of imminent danger, prevention of violent felonies or unlawful entry, subject to limitations and presumptions. Defense of others is allowed when it is reasonably apparent that the person under attack could defend themselves and your intervention is necessary. Aggressors who start a fight must withdraw before claiming self‑defense.
If you are charged after defending yourself or someone else, consult an experienced attorney. The Ambeau Law Firm has the legal knowledge and forensic expertise to evaluate your case, assert the proper defense and protect your rights.
Louisiana Laws – Louisiana State Legislature