Delaware § 465 Justification — Use of force for the protection of other persons

Delaware Statutes

§ 465 — Justification — Use of force for the protection of other persons

Delaware § 465

Title11

PartDelaware Criminal Code

Ch. 4DEFENSES TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY

This text of Delaware § 465 (Justification — Use of force for the protection of other persons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Del. Code tit. 11, § 465 (2026).

Text

(a)The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable to protect a third person when:

(1)The defendant would have been justified under § 464 of this title in using such force to protect the defendant against the injury the defendant reasonably believes to be threatened to the person whom the defendant seeks to protect; and

(2)Under the circumstances as the defendant reasonably believes them to be, the person whom the defendant seeks to protect would have been justified in using such protective force; and

(3)The defendant reasonably believes that intervention is necessary for the protection of the other person.

(b)Although the defendant would have been obliged under § 464 of this title to retreat, to surrender the possession of a thing or to comply with a demand b

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(a) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable to protect a third person when:

(1) The defendant would have been justified under § 464 of this title in using such force to protect the defendant against the injury the defendant reasonably believes to be threatened to the person whom the defendant seeks to protect; and

(2) Under the circumstances as the defendant reasonably believes them to be, the person whom the defendant seeks to protect would have been justified in using such protective force; and

(3) The defendant reasonably believes that intervention is necessary for the protection of the other person.

(b) Although the defendant would have been obliged under § 464 of this title to retreat, to surrender the possession of a thing or to comply with a demand before using force in self-protection, there is no obligation to do so before using force for the protection of another person, unless the defendant knows that the defendant can thereby secure the complete safety of the other person.

(c) When the person whom the defendant seeks to protect would have been obliged under § 464 of this title to retreat, to surrender the possession of a thing or to comply with a demand if the person knew that the person could obtain complete safety by so doing, the defendant is obliged to try to cause the person to do so before using force in the person’s protection if the actor knows that complete safety can be secured in that way.

(d) Neither the defendant nor the person whom the defendant seeks to protect is obliged to retreat when in the other’s dwelling or place of work to any greater extent than in their own.