Anthony Haire v. State, 2017 WY 48

Anthony Haire shot and killed Jamye SoRelle in a common parking area of adjoining mobile homes after SoRelle (apparently intoxicated) brandished a .41 revolver and fired into the ground near Haire’s wife and a guest.
Haire left his home to retrieve a semiautomatic pistol, took cover behind a vehicle about 25 feet from SoRelle, and fired multiple rounds, nine of which struck SoRelle.
Haire testified he believed SoRelle posed an imminent threat to his family and guests; prosecution emphasized Haire did not retreat.
Haire was charged with involuntary manslaughter (reckless killing) and reckless endangerment; the jury convicted on both counts.
The district court denied Haire’s requested castle-doctrine (no-duty-to-retreat at home) instruction, but gave a ‘‘duty to retreat’’ instruction requiring retreat before using deadly force if a safe retreat existed.
On appeal the Wyoming Supreme Court (1) overruled Duran v. State and held self-defense is available against charges based on reckless conduct, (2) affirmed denial of the castle-doctrine instruction (shooting occurred outside the home), and (3) found plain error in giving the mandatory duty-to-retreat instruction, reversed the involuntary manslaughter conviction, and remanded for retrial on that count.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether self-defense is available when the charged crime is based on reckless (not intentional) conduct	State (relying on prior precedent Duran) implicitly argued self-defense shouldn’t negate reckless culpability	Haire argued self-defense is available regardless of whether the offense requires intent or recklessness	Court overruled Duran; self-defense instructions are available when supported by evidence even for crimes based on reckless conduct
Whether trial court erred in refusing Haire’s castle-doctrine instruction (no duty to retreat at home)	Haire: entitled to stand ground at home and no duty to retreat	State: facts showed shooting occurred outside Haire’s home/curtilage so instruction inapplicable	Denial affirmed — castle doctrine did not apply because shooting occurred in a common parking area outside the home/curtilage
Whether giving a mandatory duty-to-retreat instruction was plain error	State relied on the instruction at trial and in closing to argue Haire had to retreat	Haire: instruction misstated law, imposing an absolute duty to retreat and prejudicing his defense	Court found the instruction identical to the one condemned in Drennen, constituted plain error, materially prejudiced Haire, reversed manslaughter conviction and remanded

Duran v. State, 990 P.2d 1005 (Wyo. 1999) (previously held self-defense unavailable for crimes based on reckless conduct; overruled here)
Drennen v. State, 311 P.3d 116 (Wyo. 2013) (rejects instruction imposing an absolute duty to retreat; requires instruction that deadly force is justified only if necessary and reasonable alternatives considered)
Palmer v. State, 59 P. 793 (Wyo. 1900) (early recognition of castle doctrine: no duty to retreat within the home)
State v. Rodriguez, 949 A.2d 197 (N.J. 2008) (example of authority treating self-defense as available in reckless-conduct contexts)