Self-defense claim gets another shot after high court’s remand

A woman who received a 10−year sentence from a St. Louis City jury for a shooting incident has a second chance for a self-defense claim. The Missouri Supreme Court vacated the judgment after identifying missing jury instructions.

From a car, defendant Andrea Shaunte Straughter shot at a victim twice after the victim had reached into the car window to hit Straughter. According to the opinion, Straughter at trial requested jury instructions for general self-defense and the castle doctrine, which justifies the use of deadly force when someone is lawfully in a vehicle.

The state objected to the castle doctrine instruction, claiming that the victim wasn’t in the car when Straughter fired, and the circuit court delivered only the general self-defense instruction to guide the jury’s verdict.

Public Defender Gwenda R. Robinson represented Straughter on appeal and did not respond to a call requesting comment by press time.

Judge W. Brent Powell wrote the April 26 opinion that vacated the trial court judgment, stating that the castle doctrine was relevant to the jury’s consideration.

“Straughter, or any criminal defendant, should not have to choose between two very different self-defense instructions if both instructions are substantially supported by the evidence,” Powell wrote.

Powell cited the facts in the case, which included that the victim, Markysha Randell, remained outside the car door after removing her arm from the window as another armed witness was running toward the car.

The 6−1 opinion included a dissent from Judge Robin Ransom, who agreed with the state that Randell’s removal of her arm from the car in the moment before Straughter took shots should negate the use of the castle doctrine.

“The distance to which Randell withdrew herself from the vehicle is subject to uncertainty, but no testimony directly states or implies Randell’s arm remained in the vehicle,” Ransom wrote.

The Attorney General’s Office in Jefferson City represented the state on appeal. Chris Nuelle, a spokesman for the AGO, did not respond to an email requesting comment by press time.

Powell wrote that while the jury could have concluded that Straughter’s use of force was unreasonable after all or that it wasn’t simultaneous with Randell’s arm in the car, the outcome was still up to the jury.

“… it was entitled to do so, and the circuit court’s refusal to give a castle doctrine instruction on that basis was error,” Powell wrote.

The case is State of Missouri v. Straughter, SC99170.