Opinion ID: 2365094
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Self-Defense/Defense of Others

Text: The use of force against another in self-defense is justified when the actor reasonably believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion. N.J.S.A. 2C:3-4a. Self-defense requires an actual, honest, and reasonable belief by the defendant of the necessity of using force. State v. Kelly, 97 N.J. 178, 198-99, 478 A. 2d 364 (1984). The reasonableness of the defendant's belief is determined by the jury, using an objective standard of what a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have done at the time the force was used. Id. at 199-200, 478 A. 2d 364. The jury is not required to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's belief was honest and reasonable. Id. at 200, 478 A. 2d 364. Rather, if any evidence raising the issue of self-defense is adduced, either in the State's or the defendant's case, then the jury must be instructed that the State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the self-defense claim does not accord with the facts. Ibid. For a defense of others charge, it must be shown that the use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable to protect a third person when ... [t]he actor would be justified under section 2C:3-4 in using such force to protect himself against the injury he believes to be threatened to the person whom he seeks to protect. N.J.S.A. 2C:3-5a(1). The defense is applicable if the defendant reasonably believed that the person he sought to aid was unlawfully attacked and that the force used was necessary to protect the person from the attack. State v. Bryant, 288 N.J.Super. 27, 35, 671 A. 2d 1058 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 144 N.J. 589, 677 A. 2d 761 (1996). Similar to the self-defense doctrine, the trial court is required to instruct on defense of another if there is a rational basis in the record to support it. State v. Doss, 310 N.J.Super. 450, 458-60, 708 A. 2d 1219 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 155 N.J. 589, 715 A. 2d 992 (1998). To support his claim to the charges, defendant cites to several parts of the record: Emil's testimony that tensions had been mounting in the apartment; the testimony of Fonceta Young and Joyce Poole, the two neighbors who heard thumping noises and who thought that some guys in the apartment were wrestling, playing around, or fighting before the shootings occurred; and the fact that McLean had been beaten with a steam iron before he was shot as indicating that McLean either threatened or attacked defendant causing defendant to pick up the iron and use it in self-defense. Defendant's recitation of the evidence would require a jury to make several inferences: that the sounds heard by the neighbors were fights, that one of the victims was the aggressor, that defendant was provoked into attacking the victim, and finally that deadly force was necessary to protect defendant or another person. Defendant failed to point to any facts that provide a rational basis from which a jury could reasonably infer that he acted in self-defense or in defense of another. The trial court did not err by declining those charges.