N.C.P.I.—Crim. 308.80

NOTE WELL: The use of force, including deadly force, is

justified when the defendant is acting to prevent a forcible entry

into the defendant's home, other place of residence, workplace,

or motor vehicle, or to terminate an intruder's unlawful entry. See

G.S. 14-51.1. This instruction is designed to be used instead of,

or together with, the self-defense instructions which

are incorporated in the murder charges (N.C.P.I.—Crim.

206.10, 206.11, 206.30), and those in N.C.P.I.—Crim. 308.40 or

308.45.

NOTE WELL: The trial judge is reminded that this instruction must

be combined with the substantive offense instruction in the

following manner: (1) the jury should be instructed on the

elements of the charged offense; (2) the jury should then be

instructed on the definition of defense of habitation set out in this

instruction below; (3) the jury should then be instructed on the

mandate of the charged offense; and (4) the jury should be

instructed on the mandate for self-defense as set out below in this

instruction. THE FAILURE TO CHARGE ON ALL OF THESE

MATTERS CONSTITUTES REVERSIBLE ERROR.

If the defendant [killed] [assaulted] the victim to prevent a

forcible entry into the defendant’s [home]1 [place of residence]2 [workplace]3

[motor vehicle]4, or to terminate the intruder's unlawful entry, the

defendant's actions are excused and the defendant is not guilty. The State has

the burden of proving from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that

the defendant did not act in the lawful defense of the defendant’s [home]

[place of residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle].

The defendant was justified in using (deadly) force5 6 if:

1) such force was being used to [prevent a forcible entry]

[terminate the intruder's unlawful entry] into the defendant's

[home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle];

2) the defendant reasonably believed that the intruder [would kill

or inflict serious bodily harm to the defendant or others in the

[home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle]]7

[intended to commit a felony in the [home] [place of residence]

[workplace] [motor vehicle]]; and

3) the defendant reasonably believed that the degree of force

the defendant used was necessary to [prevent a forcible entry]

[terminate the intruder's unlawful entry] into the defendant’s

[home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle].8

A lawful occupant within a [home] [place of residence]

[workplace] [motor vehicle] does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder

in these circumstances.9 Furthermore, a “person who unlawfully and by force

enters or attempts to enter a person’s [home] [place of residence] [workplace]

[motor vehicle] is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an

unlawful act involving force or violence.”10 In addition, (absent evidence to the

contrary)11, the lawful occupant of a [home] [place of residence] [workplace]

[motor vehicle] is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent death

or serious bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another when using defensive

force that is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to another

if both of the following apply:

1) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the

process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully

and forcibly entered, a [home] [place of residence] [workplace]

[motor vehicle], or if that person had removed or was attempting

to remove another against that person’s will from the [home]

[place of residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle]; and

2) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to

believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible

act was occurring or had occurred.12

It is for you, the jury, to determine the reasonableness of

the defendant's belief from the circumstances as they appeared to the

defendant at the time.

NOTE WELL: The following self-defense mandate must be

given after the mandate on each substantive offense instructed

upon. INCLUDING THE SELF-DEFENSE MANDATE IS

REQUIRED BY STATE V. WOODSON, 31 N.C. APP. 400 (1976).

Cf. State v. Dooley, 285 N.C. 158 (1974).

DEFENSE OF HABITATION MANDATE

If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant

[killed] [assaulted] the victim you may return a verdict of guilty only if the

State has satisfied you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not

act in the lawful defense of the defendant’s [home] [place of

residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle], that is,

1) that the defendant did not use such force to [prevent a

forcible entry] [terminate the intruder's unlawful entry] into the

defendant's [home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor

vehicle]; or

2) that the defendant did not reasonably believe that the

intruder [would kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the defendant

or others in the [home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor

vehicle]] [intended to commit a felony in the [home] [place of

residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle]]; or

3) that the defendant did not reasonably believe that the degree

of force the defendant used was necessary to [prevent a forcible

entry] [terminate the intruder's unlawful entry] into the

defendant's [home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor

vehicle].13

If you do not so find, or have a reasonable doubt that the State

has proved one or more of these things, then the defendant would be justified

in defending the [home] [place of residence] [workplace] [motor vehicle], and

it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.