Yeah, with Matthew McMillen shot in the back 337 feet away, even under Texas Defense of Property, among other things Lawrence would need to show that McMillen had committed burglary or was trying to escape with property. Did McMillen have stolen property on him? Did Lawrence even know at the time about the neighbor's break-in?PriestTheRunner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 30, 2018 2:05 pmLegal in Texas. The "Self-Defense" argument for the closer one is possible... but 100 yards away...?
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
Sec. 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.
Michigan legal defense of property(fleeing felon) is what is at issue and is a pretty thin defense in this case.