California Self-defense Laws – When Can I Legally Use Force? (2024)

Winning a criminal trial based on self-defense

If you think someone is about to hurt you, someone else, or your property, California’s self-defense law allows you to use enough force to prevent the harm. If the court finds that a reasonable person in your position would have fought back the same way, your criminal charges should be dismissed.

Here are five key things to know:

The force you use must match the level of threatened danger.
The danger does not need to have been real as long as your belief was reasonable.
You can use deadly force only if you reasonably fear great bodily injury or death.
California is a stand-your-ground state, so there is no duty to retreat from a fight.
California’s Castle Doctrine lets you use deadly force against an intruder who breaks into your home.

Self-defense serves as a legal defense tomany criminal offenses, including:

Our California criminal defense attorneys will answer the following frequently asked questions about our state’sself-defense laws.

1. California’s definition of self-defense
2. Defense of others
3. Defense of property
4. The Castle Doctrine
5. Can I use deadly force?
- 5.1. Can police use deadly force?
6. Self-defense applied to specific crimes
- 6.1. Battery, Penal Code 242 PC
- 6.2. Resisting arrest, Penal Code 148 PC
- 6.3. Domestic violence
- 6.4. Murder, Penal Code 187 PC
Additional resources

It is lawful to act in self-defense when being attacked, robbed, or otherwise assaulted in California.

1. California’s definition of self-defense

You legally acted in self-defense under California state law if:

you reasonably believed that you were in “imminent danger” of suffering bodily injury,¹and
you reasonably believed that the immediate use of force was necessaryto defend against that reasonable fear of imminent peril,² and
you used no more forcethan wasreasonably necessaryto defend against that danger.³

Since California is a “stand your ground state,” you do not have to retreat in order to lawfully claim self-defense – even if you had a means of escape.

If you started the fight (you were the “aggressor“), you can assert self-defense only if:

you made a good faith effort to stop fightingand indicated this to the other person, or
you initially attacked with non-deadly force, and the other person responded with deadly force.⁴

Proving self-defense

In California, you never have to prove you acted in self-defense. Instead, once you claim to the court that you acted in self-defense, the prosecution bears the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did not act in self-defense.⁵

Self-defense as an “affirmative defense”

Most defenses require you denying that you committed a crime, but self-defense is different.

Self-defense is considered an “affirmative defense.” This means that you are admitting you broke the law (by inflicting physical force on someone), but your actions were justifiableunder the circ*mstances.

2. Defense of others

California law also allows you to fight back to protect someone else other than yourself if:

you reasonably believed that the other person was in imminent danger, and
you reasonably believed you needed to use force to prevent the danger, and
you used no moreforce than necessary.⁶

3. Defense of property

In addition to protecting yourself and others, you are allowed in California to fight back to protect your property if:

4. The Castle Doctrine

Under California’s Castle Doctrine, there isno duty to retreat from an intruder in your home. You can confront them and chase them away.

The Castle Doctrine even allows you to use deadly force inside your home when an intruder uses force to break in. UnderPenal Code 198.5 PC, you are presumed to have a reasonable fear of imminent harm when someone breaks into your home.⁸

5. Can I use deadly force?

In California, you are legally justified in using deadly force in self-defense under certain circ*mstances:

you reasonably believed that you, or someone else, was in imminent danger of being killed, suffering great bodily injury, or being the victim of a forcible and atrocious crime, and
you reasonably believed that you needed to use deadly force to prevent the danger from happening, and
you used no more force than was reasonably necessary to keep the harm from occurring.⁹

Note that you can use deadly force in self-defense even if you were the original aggressor. This is provided you tried (but ultimately failed) to end the fight.¹⁰

5.1. Can police use deadly force?

Yes, but only if deadly force is necessary. Courts consider not only the officer’s actions but also the victim’s actions before the deadly blow. If police kill unnecessarily, they can face criminal charges.¹¹

6. Self-defense applied in specific crimes

6.1. Battery, Penal Code 242 PC

Batteryis theunlawful touchingof another person. California’s self-defense laws allow you to act in self-defense of a battery if you believe you are in imminent danger, even if you do not fear imminent bodily harm.¹²

6.2. Resisting arrest, Penal Code 148 PC

Resisting arrest is when you resist, delay, or obstruct an officer while they are performing their official duties.

You will not be convicted of this crime if you acted in defense of yourself to an unlawful police procedure. Further, you will not be charged if you resisted against excessive force.¹³

6.3. Domestic violence

California domestic violence laws make it a California crime to harm, or threaten to harm, an intimate partner. Common charges include:

Self-defense in these situations is justified when there is imminent danger, and the force used in response to the assailant is reasonable.¹⁴

6.4. Murder, Penal Code 187 PC

Murder is the intentional killingof another withmalice aforethought, defined as

an unlawful intention to killor
acting with areckless disregardfor human life.

If you are in imminent danger of being killed, you may take whatever measures that are necessary to prevent the killing. Deadly force is obviously expected and will be excused if reasonable and not excessive to prevent harm.

Imperfect self-defense

California’s Flannel Doctrine – also referred to as “imperfect self-defense” – applies when you kill another person based on an honest but unreasonable beliefin the need to use deadly force in self-defense.

To go into effect, the Flannel Doctrine requires a showing that:

you believed that you were in imminent perilof being killed or suffering great bodily injury,
you believed that the immediate use of deadly force was necessary to defend yourself, and
at least one of these beliefs wasunreasonable.¹⁵

Additional resources

For more in-depth information on self-defense laws, refer to these scholarly articles:

Abused Women Abused by the Law: The Plight of Battered Women in California and a Proposal for Revising the California Self-Defense Law – California Review of Law & Women’s Studies.
Justifying Self-defense – Law & Philosophy.
A Matter of Evidence or of Law – Battered Women Claiming Self-Defense in California – UCLA Women’s Law Journal.
A New Defense for Self-defense – Buffalo Law Review.
Self-Defense Re-Examined – UCLA Law Review.

Legal References:

People v. Aris (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 1178. A danger is considered imminent when there is animmediate or present threat. This is when a threat is happening right before you. An imminent danger cannot relate to something that may or may not happen in the future.
CALCRIM No. 3470. See also People v. Humphrey, supra; and, People v. Clark (1982) 130 Cal.App.3d 371. CALCRIM No. 3470. See alsoPeople v. Pena (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 462; and,People v. Miniﬁe (1996) 13 Cal.4^th1055. Whether a belief is objectively reasonable is a “question of fact” for the judge or jury, who must consider: all of the circ*mstances that wereknown to you, and how areasonable person would react in the same situation. Note that when determining reasonableness, a judge or jury can consider whether you knew that the person you fought back against threatened or harmed another in the past. Also note that people who experience mental health issues may encounter challenges in convincing others that their belief about an imminent danger is justified. For example, someone who hears voices or suffers from extreme paranoia might act to defend themselves and harm others. However, a rational person under similar circ*mstances may not perceive any threat at all.
CALCRIM No. 3470. Criminal jury instructions. See alsoPeople v. Humphrey (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1073 for more on California self-defense laws. See also People v. Pineda (2022) 13 Cal. 5th 186. CALCRIM No. 3470. If you used more force than was proportionate, you did not act in lawful defense of yourself. Someone who has beenthreatened or harmed by a person in the past is justiﬁed in acting more quickly or taking greater self-defense measures against that person.
CALCRIM No. 3470. Seealso People v. Hughes (1951) 107 Cal.App.2d 487; and,People v. Hatchett (1942) 56 Cal.App.2d 20 for more on stand your ground laws. Example: A drunk bar patron with brass knuckles approaches Nick and tells him he is going to “crush him” if he does not leave. Here, Nick can stand his ground and use force even though he could easily leave the bar and walk away from the harm. CALCRIM 3471 Mutual Combat or Initial Aggressor. Example: Greg picks a fight by pushing Tom, who responds by stabbing Greg. Here, Greg can probably pull out a gun and shoot Tom in self-defense since Tom “upgraded” the fight by using deadly force with the stab.
People v. Lee (Cal. App. 2005) 131 Cal. App. 4th 1413.
CALCRIM 505 – Justifiable Homicide.
CALCRIM 3476 – Right to Defend Real or Personal Property
California Penal Code 198.5 PC. Example: In the middle of the night, a burglar shatters John’s windows and enters the living room. John can legally fire his handgun at the burglar in self-defense or in defense of someone else in his home even if the burglar had no intent to kill anyone.
CALCRIM 505. See also William English, 2021 National Firearms Survey, Georgetown McDonough School of Business Research Paper No. 3887145 (July 16, 2021)(“Consistent with other recent survey research, the survey finds an overall rate of adult firearm ownership of 31.9%, suggesting that in excess of 81.4 million Americans aged 18 and over own firearms. The survey further finds that approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year.”). Example: Isabelle is walking home one night when a stranger jumps her, starts fondling her, and says she is going to “enjoy this.” It is likely justifiable self-defense if Isabelle kills him because she feared being raped.
CALCRIM 3471.
California Penal Code 835a;California Assembly Bill 392 (2019); Anita Chabria, “Newsom signs ‘Stephon Clark’s Law,’ setting new rules on police use of force“,Los Angeles Times, (August 19, 2019).
People v. Myers, (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 328. CALCRIM No. 3470. People v. Mathews, (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 1018. The slightest touchingcan be unlawful if it is done in arude or angry way. The touching does not even have to cause pain or injury for you to act in self-defense. Note also that the legal doctrine of “transferred intent” applies in California self-defense/battery cases. This doctrine says that: if you defend against a battery and accidentally injure a third party, you will notbe prosecuted for that injury.
Note though that you will be charged in California under PC 148 if an officer used excessive force in response to your unjustified resistance.
The typical situation is when one spouse threatens to harm, or does harm, the other spouse, and the first party uses force in response. Self-defense is also used toprotect childrenfrom harm by a spouse.
People v. Por Ye Her (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 349. See also People v. Thomas (2023) 14 Cal. 5th 327. Imperfect self-defense is not really a defense per se, although it applies like a partial defense. A jury finding that you acted in imperfect self-defense results in a charge being reduced from murder (with a possible life in prison sentence)to voluntary manslaughter (which carries three to eleven years in prison).

I am a legal expert well-versed in California's criminal defense laws, particularly in the area of self-defense. My extensive knowledge and experience in this field enable me to provide valuable insights into the nuances of winning a criminal trial based on self-defense. Now, let's delve into the concepts covered in the provided article:

1. California's Definition of Self-Defense:

Self-defense is legally justified if you reasonably believed in imminent danger of bodily injury.
Immediate use of force must be necessary to defend against the perceived threat.
The force used should be no more than reasonably necessary to counter the danger.
California being a stand-your-ground state means no duty to retreat, even if an escape is possible.

2. Proving Self-Defense:

The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that self-defense was not justified.
Self-defense is considered an affirmative defense, admitting the act but justifying it under the circ*mstances.

3. Defense of Others:

You can use force to protect someone else if you reasonably believe they are in imminent danger, and you use no more force than necessary.

4. Defense of Property:

Reasonable force is allowed to protect property if there is an imminent threat, with no duty to retreat.

5. The Castle Doctrine:

Under California's Castle Doctrine, there's no duty to retreat when facing an intruder in your home.
Deadly force is permissible when an intruder uses force to break in.

6. Use of Deadly Force:

Deadly force is justified if there is a reasonable belief of imminent danger of death, great bodily injury, or a forcible and atrocious crime.
The force used must be no more than reasonably necessary to prevent the danger.

7. Application of Self-Defense to Specific Crimes:

Self-defense can be applied to various crimes, including murder, manslaughter, mayhem, domestic battery, assault with a deadly weapon, simple battery, and simple assault.

8. Police Use of Deadly Force:

Police can use deadly force if necessary, but the actions are subject to scrutiny, and unnecessary force can lead to criminal charges.

9. Self-Defense in Specific Crimes:

Examples include self-defense in battery, resisting arrest, domestic violence, and murder.

10. Imperfect Self-Defense:

Imperfect self-defense, known as the "Flannel Doctrine," applies when deadly force is used based on an honest but unreasonable belief.
It can result in a charge reduction from murder to voluntary manslaughter.

11. Additional Resources:

Scholarly articles and legal references provide in-depth information on self-defense laws and related topics.

This comprehensive overview covers the key aspects of winning a criminal trial based on self-defense in California, offering a solid foundation for understanding the legal principles and requirements involved.