Bruenor wrote:Experts question if Castle doctrine applies to this case..
Seems he has a separate address, so presumably a different *primary* residence. If he was staying with his mother, the Castle should still apply, since Ohio's Castle law allows the defense wherever you are residing, not just your home / primary residence. From ORC 2901.05
(1) Subject to division (B)(2) of this section, a person is presumed to have acted in self defense or defense of another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if the person against whom the defensive force is used is in the process of unlawfully and without privilege to do so entering, or has unlawfully and without privilege to do so entered, the residence or vehicle occupied by the person using the defensive force.
(3) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as a guest.
(A) As used in this section, "residence" and "vehicle" have the same meanings as in section 2901.05 of the Revised Code.
(B) For purposes of any section of the Revised Code that sets forth a criminal offense, a person who lawfully is in that person's residence has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence, and a person who lawfully is an occupant of that person's vehicle or who lawfully is an occupant in a vehicle owned by an immediate family member of the person has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense or defense of another.
So as I read it, he has the presumption of acting in self defense even if just visiting, and if staying with his mother at the time, no duty to retreat.