Housecleaner Shot and Killed in Indiana After Trying to Enter Wrong House

We have another Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground controversy this week. In Whitestown, Indiana, Maria Florinda Rios Perez, 32, died in her husband’s arms after the couple went to the wrong address to clean a house. The unidentified homeowner reportedly shot through the door. A GoFundMe site has been set up for her family. She was the mother of four.

Reports indicate that the couple was trying to use a key on the door. The occupants called the police in the early morning about someone trying to open their door. As they continued to try to gain entry with the wrong key, a bullet came through the door and struck Perez.

Police responded to a call of a possible home invasion, but later concluded that “the facts gathered do not support that a residential entry occurred.” However, the department added that “It was later determined that the individuals attempting to enter the home were members of a cleaning crew who had mistakenly arrived at the wrong address.”

The matter is currently under review by the Boone County Prosecutor’s Office. Boone County Prosecutor Kent Eastwood stated that the case is complex due to language in the state’s stand-your-ground law.

Indiana has a robust law (below) that allows the use of lethal force to prevent a forcible entry into a home. It specifically provides for the use of deadly force “to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.” The “curtilage” includes the area immediately adjacent to a home

In this case, the police indicated that the couple was “attempting to enter the home.” That is why this case is particularly challenging for prosecutors. Under the law, the homeowner was not required to wait for actual entry or confirm whether the person was armed.

The common law has long offered protections even for reasonable mistakes. Castle doctrine states codified and, in some states, expanded on those common law protections. They have resulted in some highly controversial cases, such as that of Tom Horn in Texas.

The case reminds me of the Donofrio case that we discussed earlier.  He was shot and killed on the front porch of a house in Columbia, South Carolina after trying to enter the wrong home near the campus around 2 am.

It is also reminiscent of the shooting of a Japanese student in Baton Rouge. The 16-year-old Japanese exchange student, Yoshihiro Hattori, was looking for a Halloween party and scared the wife of Rodney Peairs when he spoke a strange language and approached the house. Peairs shot him in the chest with a .44 Magnum handgun and was later cleared under a Make My Day law as mistaken defense of his home and self. We also discussed a tragic case involving the killing of a law student.

The state law also supplies civil immunity for homeowners in such cases.

You can make your own assessment based on the language of the statute. The Indiana law states in part:

Sec. 2. (a) In enacting this section, the general assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to recognize the unique character of a citizen’s home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant.

…

(c) A person is justified in using reasonable force against any other person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:

(1) is justified in using deadly force; and

(2) does not have a duty to retreat;

if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person, employer, or estate of a person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.

(d) A person:

(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against any other person; and

(2) does not have a duty to retreat;

if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.