There was enough evidence to support the theory that Shane Dean Darrell French was acting in defense of his home when he threatened his parole officer, Colorado’s second-highest court determined last week. Therefore, a Montezuma County judge acted improperly by failing to instruct the jury about the state’s home defense law.

By a 2-1 decision, a panel for the Court of Appeals reversed French’s menacing conviction and ordered a new trial. Although there was no precise timeline for French’s encounter inside his home with parole officer Ryan Jenkins, all parties agreed the interaction lasted a matter of seconds. The question was whether French reasonably believed Jenkins was trespassing and, under Colorado law, was justified in using force to defend his home.

“It was for the jury to determine whether French held a reasonable belief that the parole officer was trespassing in the first instance, and it was for the jury to decide if or when that reasonable belief ceased,” wrote Judge Jaclyn Casey Brown for herself and Judge Neeti Vasant Pawar in the Sept. 1 opinion.

They decided French’s jury should have been allowed to evaluate whether he acted according to the home defense law when he rebuffed Jenkins’ attempt to make contact with him.

Judge Steve Bernard agreed French was reasonable in believing Jenkins was a trespasser at first. But once Jenkins identified himself as “Ryan with parole,” Bernard felt French could not have invoked the home defense law to justify brandishing a sock with a rock inside against Jenkins.

“Yet defendant continued to advance on the parole officer down the hallway to the living room, holding the sock containing the rock at shoulder height and yelling at the parole officer until the parole officer fired the taser at him,” Bernard explained.

On March 5, 2019, Jenkins arrived unannounced at French’s home to drop off paperwork. French had met Jenkins before and, by the terms of his parole, Jenkins was permitted to be in the house. However, French was asleep in his room at the time and French’s father let the parole officer in.

Jenkins and French’s father walked down the dark hallway to the bedroom and knocked on French’s door. In quick sequence, French yelled, “Get out of the house” and opened the door. Jenkins, who was not in uniform, had his hands on his taser and gun and said he was “Ryan with parole.”

“I didn’t let you in,” French responded, walking toward Jenkins with the sock containing a rock. Jenkins walked backward, ordered French to “drop the weapon” and then tased French twice.

Prosecutors charged French with felony menacing and assault on a peace officer. While the case was pending, Cortez reached a $200,000 settlement with French from another law enforcement encounter in 2014, when police reportedly entered his home unlawfully and repeatedly tased him.

“Now he is scared to death of the police, more paranoid and does not want to go out in public,” his father, Glenn French, told The Journal in Cortez at the time. “They jumped on a mentally challenged person who was not doing anything and tased him.”

For his criminal charges involving Jenkins, French’s attorneys asked for a jury instruction that would allow jurors to find French lawfully used force “in defense of premises.” The jury would need to find French reasonably believed someone was unlawfully trespassing on his property. 

District Court Judge Todd Jay Plewe denied the request. French’s father had invited Jenkins into the home, French himself knew who Jenkins was, and there was not a “scintilla of evidence” suggesting Jenkins was a trespasser, Plewe said.

A jury subsequently convicted French of menacing. However, jurors did not reach a unanimous verdict on the assault charge after two days of deliberations. Prosecutors later dismissed the charge.

On appeal, French emphasized there only needed to be a minimal amount of evidence suggesting he believed Jenkins was a trespasser in order for him to claim he was defending his home. A jury might not believe French, conceded Deputy State Public Defender Casey Mark Klekas, but minimal evidence did exist.

“In the light most favorable to Mr. French, he was asleep, his door was closed, he yelled ‘get out’ before he knew it was a parole officer there for a visit, and, when he opened the door to the dark hallway, Jenkins had his hands on his gun and Taser,” Klekas wrote to the Court of Appeals.

The appellate panel’s majority believed the encounter inside the home was so brief, it was not practical to look at French’s actions before Jenkins announced he was “Ryan with parole” and afterward. It may not have registered with French who Jenkins was before the officer tased him.

“On the contrary, it would have been reasonable for the jury to find that it took French more than a few seconds, roused from sleep into a dark hallway to face an unknown man with his hands on his weapons, to realize that man was his parole officer and not a trespasser,” Brown wrote.

She elaborated that the circumstances of the encounter, plus Jenkins’ shifting descriptions throughout the case, could have led jurors to believe French when he claimed he was acting in accordance with the home defense law. Therefore, Plewe’s decision not to give the jury instruction lowered the prosecution’s burden of proof and required a new trial.

Bernard, a former appellate judge who sat on the panel at the chief justice’s assignment, argued that even if Jenkins’ account was not credible on some aspects of the encounter, it was undisputed he had announced himself as “Ryan with parole” when he was at French’s bedroom door.

“The parole officer’s statement identifying himself is in the record,” Bernard wrote. “Evidence about defendant’s state of mind, such as whether he was groggy from sleep and therefore did not immediately process the parole officer’s statement, is not.”

Because he believed French had no reason to think he was dealing with a trespasser after Jenkins identified himself, Bernard indicated he would have upheld the conviction.

The case is People v. French.