Wis JI-Civil 2006.2

This case involves an allegation of unlawful and forcible entry into a (dwelling) (motor

vehicle) (place of business) and self-defense is an issue. The law of self-defense allows

(defendant) to intentionally use force if (defendant) believed (his) (her) (or) (another’s) life

was in danger, or that (he) (she) (or) (another) was likely to suffer bodily harm.

(Defendant), who alleges that (he) (she) acted in self defense, has the burden to satisfy

you by the greater weight of the credible evidence, to a reasonable certainty, that (he) (she)

reasonably believed the use of force was necessary to prevent death or bodily harm.

A belief may be reasonable even though mistaken. In determining whether

(defendant)’s beliefs were reasonable, the standard is what a person of ordinary intelligence

and prudence would have believed in (defendant)’s position under the circumstances that

existed at the time of the alleged offense. The reasonableness of (defendant)’s beliefs must

be determined from the standpoint of (defendant) at the time of (his) (her) acts and not

from the viewpoint of the jury now.

You may not consider whether (defendant) had an opportunity to flee or retreat before

(he) (she) used force and (defendant) is presumed to have reasonably believed that the force

was necessary to prevent imminent death or bodily harm to (himself) (herself) (or) (another

person), if you find that:

• (Plaintiff) was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering (defendant)’s

(dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business) or had already unlawfully and

forcibly entered (defendant)’s (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business);

• (Defendant) was present in the (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business); and

• (Defendant) knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was

occurring or had already occurred.

(NOTE: Insert a presumption instruction, Wis JI-Civil 350 or 352, adapted to the

presumption created in Wis. Stat. § 895.62(3).)

[Alternative 1: Based on Wis JI-Civil 350:

There is a conflict in the evidence as to:

• Whether (plaintiff) was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering

(defendant)’s (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business) or had already

unlawfully and forcibly entered (defendant)’s (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of

business)(;)

• Whether (defendant) was present in the (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of

business)(;) (and)

• Whether (defendant) (knew) (had reason to believe) that an unlawful and forcible

entry was occurring.

If you find the existence of each of these facts more probable than not, then by law a

presumption arises that (defendant) reasonably believed the force (defendant) used was

necessary to prevent (imminent death) (bodily harm) to (himself) (herself) (another

person). But, there is also evidence from which you may conclude that (defendant)’s belief

was not reasonable. You must resolve this conflict. Unless you are satisfied by the greater

weight of the credible evidence, to a reasonable certainty, that it is more probable that the

(defendant)’s belief was not reasonable, you must answer question _____ “yes.”]

[Alternative 2: Based on Wis JI-Civil 352:

There is no dispute in the evidence that:

• (Plaintiff) was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering (defendant)’s

(dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business) or had already unlawfully and

forcibly entered (defendant)’s (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business)(;)

• (Defendant) was present in the (dwelling) (motor vehicle) (place of business)(;)

(and)

• (Defendant) (knew) (had reason to believe) that an unlawful and forcible entry

was occurring.

From these facts, a presumption arises that (defendant) reasonably believed the force

(defendant) used was necessary to prevent (imminent death) (bodily harm) to (himself)

(herself) (another person). But, there is evidence in the case which may be believed by you

that (defendant)’s belief was not reasonable. You must resolve this conflict.

Unless you are satisfied by the greater weight of the credible evidence, to a reasonable

certainty, that it is more probable that (defendant) did not reasonably believe the force used

was necessary to prevent (imminent death) (bodily harm) to (himself) (herself) (another

person), you must answer question ____ “yes.”]

SPECIAL VERDICT

Question No. 1.

Did (defendant) commit a battery on (plaintiff) on [date of alleged battery]?

Answer: _______________

Yes or No

If you answered “Yes”: to Question No. 1, then answer Question No. 2.

Question No. 2.

Was the battery a cause of (plaintiff’s) injuries?

Answer: _______________

Yes or No

If you answered “Yes” to Question No. 2, then answer Question No. 3.

Question No. 3.

Did (defendant) act in self-defense when (he) (she) [e.g. struck] (plaintiff) on [date of

alleged battery]?

Answer: _______________

Yes or No