Castle Doctrine legal decision

Discussion in 'News, Headlines and Information' started by whitewolf68, February 1, 2013.

  1. On January 31, 2013, the Ohio First District Court of Appeals issued a decision in State of Ohio v. Woodrow W. Edwards, III, which has been reported by as deciding that the Castle Doctrine does not apply if a person is not in a car which he owns. The decision is more complex than the reportage suggests, something which is not really unexpected or unusual considering the press’ lack of understanding of the law and how it works.

    The facts of the case show that Edwards was driving his girlfriend’s automobile when her prior boyfriend saw and recognized the car and was concerned because he did not recognize the person driving it. The car was stopped at a stop sign with no traffic in the intersection when the prior boyfriend approached it and grabbed the passenger door handle. Edwards pulled his gun and cracked the passenger window, asking the prior boyfriend if he had a problem, at which point the prior boyfriend ran and called the police. Edwards was charged with aggravated menacing and raised self defense and the Castle Doctrine as part of his defense.

    Castle Doctrine legal decision | Ohio Law & Politics | News
  2. reenignEesreveR


    Interesting... Wonder how title of vehicle/home will play out with married couples. Some Lawyer is going to try to split thar hair!

    Sent from my SCH-I510 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
  3. Yeah I was wondering that as well. Seems that they are getting a bit picky about the law.
  4. Minimal Brat

    Minimal Brat

    Thought the castle doctrine said your car or immediate family. This would not include a girlfriend.

    What SB184 means to you: Part I

    In your home or vehicle (or the vehicle of an immediate family member) you may stand your ground and exercise your right to self-defense. You have no duty to retreat.
    Last edited: February 4, 2013
  5. When I was younger my parents always provided me with a notorized letter giving me permission to be in possession of their vehicle anytime I took the car out of state for more than 24 hours.
    I wonder if such a document would make a difference in this circumstance. Would that provide enough proof of rights to over come the legality of ownership.
    I still today provide friends with such a document if they are using a vehicle or trailer of mine while out of state for more than 24 hours. None have ever had to use this yet so I really don't know if it really is going to make any difference to anyone.

Share This Page