“ The person making an arrest is acting lawfully if the force and means used are such as would be considered necessary by the ordinarily reasonable person placed in the same position and if, from the standpoint of such as reasonable person, the force and means used was necessarily apparent”. People v. Martin, 168 Cal. App. 3d 1111 (5th Dist. Ct. App. 1985). We know the burglary occurred in the night, which constitutes as common law burglary. We also know common law burglary is more sever in nature than statutory burglary. It could be reasoned that the ordinary person attempting to make an arrest of two men for burglary in the night would find it reasonable to have a weapon present at the time of the apprehension. In people v. Martin, a case similar to this one, a father was vindicated by a California Court when he shot and killed a perpetrator in an attempted apprehension for common law burglary. It is probable to assume Angel Olsen did attempt to arrest the victim by lawful ways and means. Conversely, it can be argued by the state that because Angel Olsen fired not one, but two additional shots, she intended to kill, not apprehend and therefore did not attempt to detain by lawful ways and …show more content…
From Angel Olsen’s taped confession it can be inferred that when she ordered the victim to “Hold it right there. I’ve got a gun,” she was attempting to make a lawful arrest. The victim was seen inside of the establishment unauthorized at approximately 2a.m. This is clearly burglary under the common law statute “breaking and entering of a mansion-house in the night”. The precedent case tells us a homicide is justifiable when (1) a person has actually committed a felony (2) the perpetrator is fleeing or resisting and cannot otherwise be taken. Disregarding Angel Olsen’s command and attempting to escape, it is likely Kendrick Lamar could not be taken any other way. In People v. Martin which has a closely similar fact pattern, two unarmed participants in the nighttime burglary of his son’s temporarily unoccupied residence while the that participant was fleeing from the scene of the burglary was shot and killed by Martin. The court held that he was justified under section 197, subsection 4. “ The undisputed facts show that the defendant necessarily committed the homicide in attempting by lawful ways and means to apprehend the victim while fleeing from the scene of his nighttime residential burglary”. People v. Martin, 168 Cal. App. 3d 1111 (5th Dist. Ct.