Does anyone have a concise but comprehensive list/copy/location of any and all self defense case law for the whole country?
I realize that anything outside of MN is not normally pertinent in cases in state, but it is my understanding that in cases where there are no established decisions, case law from other states may be considered. With this in mind and our lack of test cases instate, it might be useful to know what decisions have been made elsewhere!

I’d appreciate any help available in acquiring and cataloging this info.

Sounds like a huge, huge job. I know researching an compiling it for just Minnesota was a significant task for Joel and Joe.

This is the closest I've seen, but I'll bet it stops at statute law:

http://www.gunlaws.com/travel.htm

No. But the basic concepts of self-defense law are very much the same throughout America. Minnesota law is consistent with the majority rule.

But isn't case law the actual clarification of the reading of the law, thereby becoming the defacto standard of the laws application?

In which case we should have available to us somewhere a compilation of all of the relevant case law so that we can understand the implications of the applicable settled law.

That's my (amateur, but looked around a fair amount) belief, too. The big differences, as far as I can tell, are:

1. How GBH is expressed (great bodily harm, grievous bodily harm, serious bodily injury, etc, etc) , not what it is, (not, obviously, a huge difference) and

2. Issues around defense/retreat in one's home. And, as Joe's pointed out, at least one wierdness in that (Missouri), comes from a partial cut-and-paste from another state's law on the subject (OK, IIRC).

3. Obligation (or not) to retreat, if practical and safe. Utah, for example, doesn't require retreat from a "lawful position" (apparently, you do have to retreat if you're trespassing; I think of that as a feature, not a bug). Most states that I've looked at do require retreat if practical/safe, and some MA cases seem to require retreat if it's at least arguably humanly possible.

Defense of others law varies dramatically in how well-developed it is. Missouri is pretty mainstream in this, with case law that says, roughly, what you can do to defend yourself, you can do to defend another. Minnesota does not have much, if any, case law on defense of others.

Orthogonally, the cynic in me goes back to Dr. Rudd's lecture about 7 plus or minus 2. Short form: your brain can, when not under stress, hand 5 to 9 things at one time. Under stress, blood flow patterns in the brain change, and the number drops.

Question: if you can -- because of the physical limitations of your brain -- only deal with, say, three things at a given time, what are the chances that you'll be able to make a decision about the mechanics of shooting/notshooting AND consider three or four (depending on how you count) legally mandated requirements for the use of lethal force?

Yup. And that's what Joe's talking about -- "the law" , in this case, is both the statutes and the case law. The four (or, depending on how you count) three principles keep showing up in case law all over the place, although they're often expressed in different ways.

... and David, and that with the help of a very talented (and lovely!) professional librarian.

Yup; it was a lot of work.

Missouri was a bitch, too. (Even though I had Jameson's book as a resource.) NoDak, by comparison, is relatively easy. Having looked at it for some time, I'm not sure that NY's law is understandable by us lesser mortals. There's strange stuff there. (And don't get me started on Louisiana...)

Joel,

You're making my point.

There is a great problem with the complexity of the law, and how it has been applied. I understand that the same points will surface over and over, but Nuance is what case law is all about. If we have somwhere several states caselaw compiled, perhaps we could contact other states to see if someone coud provide a similar compendium until a comprehensive package has been assembled. It would be an invaluble teaching tool and a great resource for all concerned, especially for those who travel.

Sure. I agree that it's complex, and that nuance is important. That said, if there is a useful way to systematize this sort of nuance, it's above my pay grade.

And, even if one could, that still wouldn't do what I think you want it to do. What the law is changes both with legislation, with new case law and -- importantly, I think -- with social changes even before there's new case law and/or new legislation. (Consider, for a moment, a conviction of a Mexican for carrying a concealed weapon -- when he was "carrying" it by having it in his bed in his home while asleep. What statutory or case law principles were involved? Mexicans are bad?)

I seem to recall that Louisiana was the state where the guy shot and killed some foreign college student *in his front yard* and got away with it.

IIRC, the situation got cloned for an episide of "Homicide: Life on the Street" with the victim made Turkish(?) and the homeowner made a racist, apparently to fit the mold that gun owners interested in defending their home are racists.

It was, as I recall, his driveway, but, sure. That said, while he made at least a couple of mistakes (going out to confront the intruder, for one), the reason that he wasn't prosecuted is that it pretty clearly was the LA equivalent of "defense of dwelling." He didn't know -- and had reason to believe otherwise -- that the college kid meant him no harm.

He got nailed on the civil suit, by the way.