University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Articles Colorado Law Faculty Scholarship 2010 Note, A Defensible Defense?: Reexamining Castle Doctrine Statutes Benjamin Levin University of Colorado Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Law and Race Commons, and the Legal History Commons Citation Information Benjamin Levin, Note, A Defensible Defense?: Reexamining Castle Doctrine Statutes, 47 HARV. J. ON LEGIS. 523 (2010), available at https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles/450. Copyright Statement Copyright protected. Use of materials from this collection beyond the exceptions provided for in the Fair Use and Educational Use clauses of the U.S. Copyright Law may violate federal law. Permission to publish or reproduce is required. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Colorado Law Faculty Scholarship at Colorado Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of Colorado Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. +(,121/,1( Citation: 47 Harv. J. on Legis. 523 2010 Provided by: William A. Wise Law Library Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline Thu May 4 14:01:07 2017 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: Copyright Information NOTE A DEFENSIBLE DEFENSE?: REEXAMINING CASTLE DOCTRINE STATUTES BENJAMIN LEVIEN* I. INTRODUCTION On the night of Wednesday, August 9, 2006, John White, a fifty-three- year-old asphalt company laborer shot and killed seventeen-year-old Daniel Cicciaro Jr. on the front lawn of White's house in suburban Miller Place, Long Island.' While the events that precipitated the shooting remain clouded in con- troversy, it is uncontested that earlier that evening Cicciaro had argued vio- lently with White's teenage son, Aaron.2 After learning from a friend's sister that she thought Aaron intended to rape her, Cicciaro had gone into a drunken rage, had threatened Aaron over the phone, and had driven with four friends (one armed with a baseball bat) to White's house.3 The elder White left his house armed with a pistol and shot Cicciaro after a heated, 4 profanity-laced exchange. There was no allegation that Cicciaro produced a weapon,5 and, unlike more than twenty other states,6 New York does not have an expansive "cas- tle doctrine" of self-defense on which White could rely. In other words, in New York, the fact that Cicciaro threateningly entered White's property without permission did not grant White a prima facie right to resort to deadly force.7 As a result, White's defense rested on convincing a Suffolk County * B.A., Yale University, 2007; J.D. Candidate, Harvard Law School, Class of 2011. Many thanks to Carol Steiker for her comments on earlier drafts and invaluable support throughout the writing process, as well as to Janet Halley for her suggestions and advice. I am also thank- ful to Harvard Law School, which funded this project through its Summer Academic Fellow- ship Program. ' For a detailed account of the facts (both disputed and undisputed) of the shooting, see Calvin Trillin, The Color of Blood: Race, memory, and a killing in the suburbs, NEW YORKER, Mar. 3, 2008, at 30-39. 21 d. at 31-32. 3Id. at 33. 4 See id. at 34. See id. at 32. 6 Cf National Rifle Association ("NRA") Inst. for Legislative Action, Nebraska: Castle Doctrine, Feb. 17, 2010, http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID = 13415. 7 New York does recognize a weak form of the common law castle doctrine, but unlike more expansive recent castle law statutes, it still requires proof that the home dweller's fear of the intruder's imminent violent behavior was reasonable. See N.Y. PENAL LAW § 35.15 (Mc- Kinney 2004). Further, it does not presume a threat of imminent violence based on the intru- sion alone. See § 35.15. Harvard Journal on Legislation [Vol. 47 jury that he reasonably feared for his own (and his family's) safety.' White had good reason to feel threatened, his attorney insisted, in large part be- cause of his race.9 Unlike 99.5% of the population of Miller Place, and un- like Cicciaro and his friends, White was black. 0 Even more important in the eyes of the defense was the fact that White's ancestors had been chased from their Alabama home by members of the Ku Klux Klan, causing White to associate the aggressive incursion of white men with a legacy of intense racial violence." Rooted firmly in this narrative of racial conflict and raising questions of how integrated Long Island really was, the trial attracted tremendous media coverage and public attention. 2 Cicciaro's friends and family demanded ven- geance and loudly denounced the allegations that race had played a signifi- cant role in the confrontation and homicide. 3 In White's defense, civil rights activists led by Reverend Al Sharpton decried what they viewed as an at- tempted modem day lynching,14 while advocates of gun rights and self-de- fense claimed that White had been acting in the necessary defense of his and his family's lives and honor.'5 In 2007, White was ultimately convicted of manslaughter by a jury with one black member and sentenced to a prison term of two to four years, which he is serving as of this writing. 6 This Note does not begin its exploration of the castle doctrine with the case of John White to suggest that the doctrine would necessarily have re- sulted in White's exoneration. There is, in fact, reason to believe the prosecu- tion could have successfully refuted such a defense; based on the evidence, a reasonable jury could have concluded that White went out of his way to leave his house to confront the youths, and it is unclear whether Cicciaro and his friends were actually on White's property at the time of the shooting."' Rather, this case serves as an instructive starting point because it demon- 8 See Trillin, supra note 1, at 34. 'See Nicholas Hirshon et al., Guilty Verdict for Black Dad in Shooting Death of White Teen on Long Island, N.Y. DAILY NEWS, Dec. 23, 2007, available at http://www. nydailynews.com/news/ny-crime/2007/12/22/2007-12-22-guilty.Yerdict for-black-dad-in_ shooting.html. 0 See Trillin, supra note 1, at 30. See id. at 35-36. ,2 See infra notes 14-16, '3 See Trillin, supra note 1, at 32. "4See John Lauinger & Carrie Melago, Sharpton, John White Rally Protestersafter Long Island Race-Slay Verdict, N.Y. DAuLy NEWS, Jan. 6, 2008, available at http://www.nydaily news.com/news/nycrime/2008/01/06/2008-01-06-sharpton-john-white-rally-protestersaft- I html. " See, e.g., Cyd Malone, The Tragedy of John White, NEwsLI.coM, Oct. 14, 2008, http:H www.newsli.com/2008/10/14/the-tragedy-of-john-white/. 6 See, e.g., Selim Algar, Dad of Slay Victim Rages: Livid at Wrist Slap, N.Y. POST, Mar. 20, 2008, at 11. Following the rendering of the verdict, there were numerous allegations that jurors felt coerced (at times due to violent behavior by other jurors) to find White guilty. Interestingly, jurors claimed that for a long stretch before they reached consensus, the vote had been ten to two. See Patrick Whittle & Erik German, Jury in John White Trial Boiled with Tension, NEWSDAY, Jan. 5, 2008. '" See Trillin, supra note 1, at 35. 2010] A Defensible Defense? strates the complexity of self-defense in the home and highlights the cultural and political conflicts and unexpected alliances that the debate over its appli- cation evokes. The goal of this Note is to explore the current discourse surrounding the castle doctrine. White's case seems to subvert and perhaps even invert many of the assumptions about the doctrine. First, critics of the castle doctrine frequently argue that there is no reason to legislate a specific defense for homeowners who shoot home invaders because there is rarely support for the victims or pressure to prosecute the homeowners. 8 In this case, however, Cicciaro's family and friends were some of the most vocal players in the proceeding. 19 Also, in this case, the traditional victims' rights procedural ele- ment-victim impact statements at sentencing-were used to try to increase the punishment for the homeowner, making the intruder, instead of the home dweller, the victim in the victims' rights paradigm. 20 Finally, rather than evoking the socially conservative image of the culturally dominant white frontiersman, this case summons up the image of the Southern black be- sieged by a murderous posse. Here the castle doctrine serves as a potentially antimajoritarian defense, or a possible means by which the law might level the playing field between the marginalized and the marginalizer. Despite these unusual elements, the coverage and controversy over White's conviction is far from unique in the current landscape of criminal prosecutions. 21 The last decade has seen increased support for and adoption of castle doctrine-based laws.2 2 The passage of such laws and subsequent uses of the defense have captured the public imagination, prompting signifi- cant media attention, as well as skeptical and critical scholarship from the legal academic community.