Under California Penal Code § 196, a peace officer may claim justifiable homicide when a person’s death results from the officer’s use of force in compliance with Penal Code § 835a or when the officer acts in obedience to a judgment of a competent court. This legal provision may serve as a defense when a peace officer faces criminal charges involving a fatal use of force. However, the officer must satisfy specific legal requirements for the homicide to be considered justified.
Understanding justifiable homicide is important for peace officers accused of murder or manslaughter following a fatal encounter. California law establishes strict limits on when officers may use deadly force, and whether a killing is justified depends on the circumstances, available evidence, and applicable legal standards.
What Is Justifiable Homicide Under California Penal Code § 196?
Justifiable homicide refers to a killing that the law recognizes as legally justified under specific circumstances.
California Penal Code § 196 identifies two situations in which a homicide committed by a peace officer, or someone acting under the officer’s command in providing assistance, may be justified:
- Obedience to a court judgment: When an officer causes someone’s death while carrying out a judgment issued by a competent court.
- Use of force under Penal Code § 835a: When the death results from an officer’s use of force that complies with California’s police use-of-force requirements.
The second circumstance is particularly relevant to police-involved shootings and other fatal encounters.
In simple terms, justifiable homicide by a peace officer is a killing that satisfies the legal conditions established by California law. An officer’s position or official duties do not automatically make a killing justified. The circumstances and the officer’s actions must meet the applicable legal requirements.
When Can Police Officers Legally Use Deadly Force in California?
California Penal Code § 835a establishes when peace officers may use physical force and deadly force while performing their duties.
Under this law, officers may use objectively reasonable force when necessary to make an arrest, prevent escape, or overcome resistance.
However, deadly force is subject to stricter requirements. An officer may use deadly force when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that it is necessary for either of the following purposes:
- Defending against an imminent threat: Protecting the officer or another person from an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
- Apprehending a fleeing felony suspect: Apprehending someone fleeing after committing a felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, when the officer reasonably believes the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended.
These requirements prevent officers from using deadly force simply because someone resists arrest, refuses instructions, or attempts to escape.
What Qualifies as an Imminent Threat?
An imminent threat exists when a reasonable officer in the same situation would believe that a person has the present ability, opportunity, and apparent intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury.
A possible future threat or generalized suspicion is not enough.
Example:
An officer responds to an emergency and encounters an individual pointing a loaded firearm at another person. The individual appears ready to shoot.
If the officer reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent attack, using deadly force may be legally justified.
However, if the individual drops the weapon and no longer presents an imminent threat, the officer cannot automatically rely on the earlier threat to justify a subsequent use of deadly force.
The circumstances at the time the force is used are critical.
Can Police Shoot Someone Who Is Fleeing?
Not simply because someone is running away.
Under Penal Code § 835a, deadly force against a fleeing person requires specific conditions:
- The person is fleeing after committing a qualifying felony.
- The felony created a risk of death or serious bodily injury to another person or resulted in death or serious bodily injury.
- The officer reasonably believes the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended.
- The force is reasonably believed to be necessary to arrest or detain the fleeing person.
When feasible, officers must also make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as peace officers and warn that deadly force may be used, unless objectively reasonable grounds exist to believe the person already knows these facts.
Example:
An individual commits a violent felony involving serious bodily injury and flees while continuing to present a threat to others. If the officer reasonably believes the individual will cause another death or serious bodily injury unless immediately apprehended, deadly force may be justified if the other statutory requirements are satisfied.
By contrast, fleeing after a property crime alone does not justify deadly force.
Can Police Use Deadly Force Against Someone Threatening Suicide?
Generally, no. Penal Code § 835a prohibits deadly force based solely on the danger an individual poses to themselves when an objectively reasonable officer would believe that the individual does not present an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
For example, an individual experiencing a mental health crisis may threaten self-harm without threatening anyone else. That situation alone does not satisfy California’s requirements for using deadly force.
How Does California Determine Whether a Police Shooting Was Justified?
California evaluates a peace officer’s use of deadly force based on the totality of the circumstances.
This means investigators must consider the relevant facts surrounding the encounter rather than examining only the moment when the officer fired a weapon.
Under Penal Code § 835a, relevant considerations may include:
- Whether the individual possessed a weapon.
- Whether the individual presented an imminent threat.
- Whether the officer gave warnings when feasible.
- Whether the individual was attacking someone or attempting to flee.
- Whether other reasonably safe and feasible alternatives were available.
- Whether the officer’s conduct contributed to escalating the encounter.
The law recognizes that officers sometimes must make decisions in rapidly developing situations. Their actions are evaluated based on the circumstances as they reasonably appeared at the time.
Does an Officer Have to Consider Alternatives Before Using Deadly Force?
Yes, when reasonably safe and feasible.
California law requires officers to consider other available resources and techniques when reasonably safe and feasible under the circumstances.
Possible alternatives include:
- Verbal warnings and communication.
- Creating additional distance.
- Waiting for backup.
- Using available less-lethal options.
- Tactical repositioning and de-escalation.
These alternatives are not mandatory in every emergency. An officer facing an immediate threat may not have time to consider other options.
However, the availability of reasonably safe alternatives may be relevant when determining whether deadly force was necessary.
Can a Police Officer Be Charged for an Unjustified Killing?
Yes. A peace officer may face criminal prosecution when the evidence supports a criminal offense and the killing does not qualify as legally justified.
A police officer’s position does not automatically provide immunity from criminal responsibility.
California Criminal Jury Instruction CALCRIM No. 507 addresses justifiable homicide by peace officers. It explains that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was not justified.
If the prosecution fails to establish that the killing was unjustified beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury must find the defendant not guilty of the charged homicide offense.
This distinction is important because justifiable homicide is a legal defense that must be evaluated based on the evidence and applicable legal standards.
What Evidence Is Considered in a Police Shooting Investigation?
Investigators may examine different types of evidence to determine whether an officer’s use of deadly force was justified.
| Evidence | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Body camera footage | Documents the officer’s perspective and actions |
| Dash camera recordings | Provides additional footage of the encounter |
| Witness statements | Helps establish what happened |
| Surveillance footage | May independently document the incident |
| Ballistics evidence | Helps determine firearm-related circumstances |
| Autopsy reports | Establishes the cause and circumstances of death |
| Dispatch recordings | Shows information communicated to officers |
| Police reports | Documents the incident and investigative findings |
No single piece of evidence necessarily determines whether a homicide was justified. Investigators must consider the complete circumstances.
Can Families File a Wrongful Death Lawsuit After a Police Shooting?
Yes, potentially. Eligible surviving family members may pursue a wrongful death claim when a person’s death results from another party’s legally actionable conduct.
Depending on the circumstances, potential claims may involve:
- Excessive use of force.
- Negligence.
- Violations of constitutional rights.
- Wrongful death under California law.
A civil lawsuit is separate from a criminal prosecution. An officer may not face criminal charges, but that does not automatically eliminate every possible civil claim.
Families may also have grounds to pursue a federal civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if an officer acting under color of state law violated the deceased person’s constitutional rights.
Importantly, a finding of justifiable homicide under California criminal law does not automatically resolve every potential federal civil rights claim. Civil liability involves separate legal standards, claims, and defenses.
Claims against government entities may also involve special administrative claim requirements and deadlines. Families should understand these requirements before pursuing legal action.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is justifiable homicide under California Penal Code § 196?
Justifiable homicide under Penal Code § 196 refers to a killing by a peace officer that is legally justified when performed in obedience to a competent court’s judgment or when the resulting death comes from force used in compliance with Penal Code § 835a.
2. Can police officers legally use deadly force in California?
Yes. Officers may use deadly force when they reasonably believe it is necessary to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury, or to apprehend a qualifying fleeing felony suspect who presents the required danger to another person.
3. Does Penal Code § 196 give police officers immunity?
No. Section 196 does not provide automatic immunity. Officers may face criminal prosecution if their actions constitute a criminal offense and the killing does not qualify as legally justified.
4. What is the difference between Penal Code § 196 and § 835a?
Penal Code § 196 establishes when a homicide by a peace officer may be justified. Penal Code § 835a establishes the standards governing police use of force, including when deadly force may legally be used.
5. Can police shoot someone who is running away?
Not simply because the person is fleeing. The fleeing-felon provision requires a qualifying felony involving a risk of or resulting in death or serious bodily injury, along with a reasonable belief that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended.
6. Can police use deadly force against someone threatening suicide?
Not solely because the person threatens self-harm. California law generally prohibits deadly force in this situation when the person does not present an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
7. What happens if a police shooting is found unjustified?
Depending on the evidence, the officer may face criminal prosecution, civil liability, or administrative consequences. The specific outcome depends on the circumstances and applicable legal requirements.
Key Takeaways
- California Penal Code § 196 recognizes specific circumstances in which a peace officer’s homicide may be justified.
- Penal Code § 835a establishes the requirements for lawful police use of deadly force.
- Deadly force generally requires an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury, or a qualifying fleeing-felon situation.
- Police officers cannot automatically use deadly force against individuals who resist arrest, flee, or threaten only themselves.
- Investigators must consider the totality of the circumstances when evaluating a fatal police encounter.
- An unjustified killing may result in criminal prosecution and potential civil liability.
- Criminal justification and civil liability are separate legal questions.
Contact Southwest Legal
Have Questions About California’s Justifiable Homicide Laws?
A peace officer facing criminal charges after a fatal use-of-force incident may have serious legal questions about justifiable homicide under California Penal Code § 196. Understanding the circumstances surrounding the incident, the applicable use-of-force standards, and the available legal defenses is essential when building a criminal defense.
At Southwest Legal, we understand the seriousness of homicide allegations and the importance of protecting the rights of individuals accused of criminal offenses. Examining the evidence, evaluating the circumstances of the encounter, and identifying applicable legal defenses are important steps in addressing these charges.
If you are a peace officer facing murder or manslaughter charges involving a fatal use-of-force incident, contact us today for a free consultation. Let us help you understand your legal rights, evaluate your potential defenses, and determine the next steps in protecting your future.
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship unless and until the firm and client enter into an agreement for legal services. Laws may change, and legal outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case. Consult a qualified attorney for advice regarding your situation.