CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 441
Negligent Use of Deadly Force by Peace Officer—Essential
Factual Elements
A peace officer may use deadly force only when necessary in defense of
human life. [Name of plaintiff] claims that [name of defendant] was
negligent in using deadly force to [arrest/detain/ [,/or] prevent escape of/
[,/or] overcome resistance to] [him/her/ nonbinary pronoun/name of
decedent]. To establish this claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove all of the
following:
1. That [name of defendant] was a peace officer;
2. That [name of defendant] used deadly force on [name of
plaintiff/decedent];
3. That [name of defendant]’s use of deadly force was not necessary
to defend human life;
4. That [name of plaintiff /decedent] was [harmed/killed]; and
5. That [name of defendant]’s use of deadly force was a substantial
factor in causing [name of plaintiff /decedent]’s [harm/death].
[Name of defendant]’s use of deadly force was necessary to defend human
life only if a reasonable officer in the same situation would have believed,
based on the totality of the circumstances known to or perceived by
[name of defendant] at the time, that deadly force was necessary [either]:
[to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury
to [name of defendant] [and/or] [another person]][; or/.]]
[to apprehend a fleeing person for a felony, when all of the following
conditions are present:
i. The felony threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily
injury to another;
ii. [Name of defendant] reasonably believed that the person fleeing
would cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless
immediately apprehended; and
iii. [Name of defendant] made reasonable efforts to identify
[himself/herself/nonbinary pronoun] as a peace officer and to
warn that deadly force may be used, unless the officer had
objectively reasonable grounds to believe the person is aware
of those facts.]
[A peace officer must not use deadly force against persons based only on
the danger those persons pose to themselves, if an objectively reasonable
officer would believe the person does not pose an imminent threat of
death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or to another person.]
[A person being [arrested/detained] has a duty not to use force to resist a
peace officer unless the peace officer is using unreasonable force.]
[“Deadly force” is force that creates a substantial risk of causing death
or serious bodily injury. It is not limited to the discharge of a firearm.]
A threat of death or serious bodily injury is “imminent” if, based on the
totality of the circumstances, 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 to
the peace officer or to another person. An imminent harm is not merely
a fear of future harm, no matter how great the fear and no matter how
great the likelihood of the harm, but is one that, from appearances, must
be instantly confronted and addressed.
“Totality of the circumstances” means all facts known to or perceived by
the peace officer at the time, including the conduct of [name of defendant]
and [name of plaintiff /decedent] leading up to the use of deadly force. In
determining whether [name of defendant]’s use of deadly force was
necessary in defense of human life, you must consider [name of
defendant]’s tactical conduct and decisions before using deadly force on
[name of plaintiff /decedent] and whether [name of defendant] used other
available resources and techniques as [an] alternative[s] to deadly force,
if it was reasonably safe and feasible to an objectively reasonable officer.
[A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest does not have
to retreat or stop because the person being arrested is resisting or
threatening to resist. Tactical repositioning or other deescalation tactics
are not retreat. A peace officer does not lose the right to self-defense by
using objectively reasonable force to [arrest/detain/ [,/or] prevent escape/
[,/or] overcome resistance].]
New November 2020
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2025
- Content hash
d25db32479c5303d0b78eeb1e415bfc9e7b52d38a4624061a33f4afde05429b0
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.