The Office of the State’s Attorney for Baltimore City has concluded its investigation into the October 16th shooting of Richard Rolfe on Fleet Street, determining that the use of lethal force was justified under the state’s self-defense laws, according to a press release. The review by the Homicide Unit found that the conditions for the defense of habitation, which allows for lethal force to be used in defense of one's home under certain circumstances, were met in this case.
State's Attorney Ivan J. Bates underscored the importance of an impartial review process, stating, "Based on the facts of this case, we believe that this shooting meets the requirements of self-defense in the State of Maryland." Bates emphasized that the prosecutor's office has an obligation to analyze such incidents without bias, and to keep families of victims informed before making public declarations about whether charges will be pursued.
Details provided by the State's Attorney's Office outlined the five criteria needed to claim defense of habitation: an unlawful entry, a belief of imminent danger, a reason to believe a serious crime was intended, the necessity of force used, and the homeowner's reasonable belief in that necessity. In Rolfe's case, the homeowner understandably presumed that he was armed, which legally justified the use of deadly force despite the subsequent finding that Rolfe did not actually possess a gun.
The decision not to bring charges is based on Maryland Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 4:17.2 standards, which require the state to prove the absence of any of the five defense criteria beyond a reasonable doubt to charge someone with homicide in such circumstances. The homeowner's belief about the imminent danger posed by Rolfe’s perceived actions aligned with the legal framework; hence, the State concluded that the shooting was within legal bounds.
