Michael Schwartz Convicted

[scotts87iroc]

What is the complete story to this? I saw on KARE11.com that he was charged with "Recklessly handling a firearm" when he accidentally shot his best friend. The story doesn't go into details but said that he shot his best friend when he thought the friend was an intruder breaking into his apartment.

Why is that recklessly handling a firearm? Is it because he knew the intruder? How does Minnesota law protect a homeowner that is protecting his property? I'm guessing there is more to the story than what is reported. Again, my thought, Minnesota doesn't have the Castle Doctrine or Stand your Ground, but an apartment usually has only one entrance. If that is being breached by an intruder, you have no escape so you need to shoot to protect further intrusion, right? I hope Minnesota fixes that part of the law before I become a permanent resident!

[plblark]

MN has defense of dwelling but it has conditions. The offender must be committing a Felony and the force must be reasonable. Castle doctrine would not have prevented this.

[xd ED]

Burnsville man sentenced to 90 days for shooting friend


"...Schwartz, his cousin and Ahlers had been drinking at a Burnsville bar, a criminal complaint said. When the bar closed, the other two men left without Schwartz.

Within an hour, Ahlers called Schwartz at his apartment and asked to come in, but Schwartz told investigators he refused, according to the complaint.

Schwartz, who was armed, later found Ahlers in his apartment hallway, where the two wrestled. The gun went off, fatally shooting Ahlers in the neck, the complaint said...."

http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_16903897?source=rss

[Heffay]

If that is being breached by an intruder, you have no escape so you need to shoot to protect further intrusion, right? I hope Minnesota fixes that part of the law before I become a permanent resident!

If you have no escape, you're allowed to shoot to defend yourself.

[hammAR]

If that is being breached by an intruder, you have no escape so you need to shoot to protect further intrusion, right? I hope Minnesota fixes that part of the law before I become a permanent resident!

If you have no escape, you're allowed to shoot to defend yourself.

That is not true, apartments always have an escape route and you have a duty to retreat,
and you will get in far less trouble jumping out of your 5th story bedroom window than if you shoot an intruder....

[tman]

The charge is most likely the result of a plea deal.

Fits the facts well enough and the sentencing guidelines call for a lesser sentence. Since the sentences are set, it's the charge that gets shopped.

[Heffay]

That is not true, apartments always have an escape route and you have a duty to retreat,
and you will get in far less trouble jumping out of your 5th story bedroom window than if you shoot an intruder....

I just went by the scenario he provided. He said there was no escape. If there was, then he was wrong in the assertion.

[hammAR]

That is not true, apartments always have an escape route and you have a duty to retreat,
and you will get in far less trouble jumping out of your 5th story bedroom window than if you shoot an intruder....

I just went by the scenario he provided. He said there was no escape. If there was, then he was wrong in the assertion.

aaaah, shirking responsibility and delegating accountability, good game......

[scotts87iroc]

All I saw was a blurb on Kare11 that said he shot his best friend because he thought he was an intruder. Nothing was reported that they were drinking or that he was shot in the hallway, etc. Here is what I saw.

HASTINGS, Minn. -- A Burnsville man has been sentenced to 90 days in jail in the accidental shooting death of his best friend.
Twenty-six-year-old Michael Cody Schwartz has to serve half of the 90-day sentence. The other 45 days were stayed for one year.
The Star Tribune reports the judge credited Schwartz for serving nine days. Schwartz also was given a year of probation and 50 hours of community service.
Last month, Dakota County District Judge Michael Sovis convicted Schwartz on a misdemeanor charge of recklessly handling a firearm. The judge acquitted Schwartz of second-degree manslaughter and other charges.
Schwartz was accused in the November 2009 shooting of 25-year-old Logan Ahlers. The St. Paul Pioneer Press reports Schwartz told police he thought his friend was an intruder breaking into his apartment.

Based on this, I believe he has the right to defend his property. Based on the facts that were mentioned here, I agree and he should probably get a stiffer sentence.

In response to the one post about Castle Doctrine wouldn't protect...it sure would. In Florida, if I'm in my family room watching tv and my front door is locked and someone forces their way in, I can shoot them. The fact that they are breaching my locks is considered a threat. I also don't have to drag the person inside my house if they fall outside! I see it in the news all the time that a little old lady shot someone through the door because they tried breaking in. No charges are brought because she was in fear of her safety and that of her property.

PLease explain why the Castle Doctrine wouldn't protect a person in a shooting based solely on the news report as listed above.

[plblark]

The news report listed above is not the complete facts nor the politics of the matter. Sadly, both play into the decision to charge and the outcome. Given the more complete picture painted by combining multiple news reports ... I don't think Castle Doctrine would help this guy.

Or do you have a similar case of mistaken identity, young, drunk, occupant shooting his "friend" during a prank invasion where there were no charges.

Often the cases have a sympathetic homeowner and that's why they make the news and no charges are filed.

[JohnGageMN]

If that is being breached by an intruder, you have no escape so you need to shoot to protect further intrusion, right? I hope Minnesota fixes that part of the law before I become a permanent resident!

If you have no escape, you're allowed to shoot to defend yourself.

That is not true, apartments always have an escape route and you have a duty to retreat,
and you will get in far less trouble jumping out of your 5th story bedroom window than if you shoot an intruder....

I don't know that is has any bearing on this particular case, but you do not have a duty to retreat in defense of dwelling. Anyplace outside of your home you do, but not inside it.

Applicable case law: http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archi ... 101894.htm

1. The rule in State v. Glowacki, 630 N.W.2d 392 (Minn. 2001), that when acting in self-defense there is no duty to retreat from one’s own home even if the aggressor is a co-resident, applies retroactively.

2. The district court’s instruction that respondent had a duty to retreat from his home constitutes plain error and requires a new trial.

[scotts87iroc]

I was originally asking because I figured there had to be more to the case than KARE11 reported. My thought only was that this guy is protecting himself and his property from an illegal break in. Again, this was before anybody gave more details. Based on the report from KARE11 ONLY, would he have been charged with reckless discharge of a firearm in Minnesota if he thought he was about to be robbed or possibly worse?

With the new facts that have been provided, I believe the charges are not harsh enough since he was drinking and fighting before the incident. I was just concerned that if the KARE11 report was all there was to it, then the MN laws and the right to defend oneself are very limiting.

[JohnGageMN]

The original case mentioned: http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archi ... 991507.htm

There is no duty to retreat from one’s own home when acting in self-defense in the home regardless of whether the aggressor is a co-resident, although any use of force must be reasonable under the specific circumstances of each case.

And another: http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archi ... c89886.htm

A duty to retreat does not attach to defense of dwelling claims. So long as a person claiming defense of dwelling meets all of the criteria for making his or her claim – that the killing was done in the belief that it was necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling, that the person's judgment as to the gravity of the situation was reasonable under the circumstances, and that the person's election to defend his or her dwelling was such as a reasonable person would have made in light of the danger to be apprehended – the person need not have attempted to retreat from his or her home.

[carver952]

Strange Minnesota law:Trespass is only a misdemeanor
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=609.605
So, shooting to stop a trespass is considered excessive force
unless there was threat of bodily harm.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=609.06
reasonable force may be used resisting a trespass

So if the police don't see intent of burglary, the resident can be charged.

[hammAR]