Legal precedence for resisting unlawful arrest?

[mc01svt]

Does anyone here have a clear understanding of the validity of "legally" resisting an unlawful arrest? :shrug:

There seems to be 2 intrepretations that are completely on opposite sides of the spectrum.

A. LEOs in the field have basically unlimited arrest powers, do not resist under any circumstances. :nono: Doing so will result in an sequence of escalating amount of force including lethal. Even if the original interaction was stemming from a minor none-violent civil offense or a case of mistaken identity. In addition LEOS and federal agents are shielded from unlawful arrest lawsuits per qualified immunity.

B. An unlawful arrest/detention is an assault and citizens have a right to defend themselves and/or escape from the officer per U.S. constitution.

http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

 

[Deceptive]

To me, I would rather just shut my mouth and get arrested and then get a good lawyer and file a suit against the officer and the department for "unlawful arrest". Who cares how unlawful the arrest is when you are dead because you gave the officer a reason.

That said, I feel like too many people are willing to make themselves martyrs today. Why? Because media has zero liability in what they report and how they report it. It is a speak first, check facts later venue. Especially when it involves a Non-Saltine American. Poor Joe McDirtbag Criminal was just minding his own business breaking the law when Officer Wyatt Earp stopped him and then Joe McCriminal was not happy that he was held to a standard set forth by the community so Joe McCriminal turned into Joe McConstitutionalrights. Even though Joe McCriminal can not get my Big Mac order right.

 

[Zerohe]

Seems like you need to shutup and get arrested and make a call to your lawyer. But in Sandra Bland's case, Im not so sure thats a good idea.

 

[jlm961]

Yep. Resisting arrest is almost always never going to end well. I got hauled in one night for a suspected DWI and proceeded to blow a .06 when the legal limit was .08. Just had a few beers with the boys after work, nothing stupid. Yet I was still held overnight and treated basically like a criminal then handed a ticket before I left the next morning because the arresting officer felt that I was impaired and made up some bs that I was swerving all over the place. $400 later I got out of the ticket via my lawyer but he even told me that law enforcement can arrest and hold you for up to 24 hours with no charges filed for nothing more than "reasonable suspicion" which could amount to almost any type of conjured up crap. IMHO it's best to just keep it civil, don't say anything that might incriminate yourself and let the lawyers hatch it out later. It was better to spend a night in jail than to wind up in more s*** to prove a point. After that the cops in that town knew my vehicle and I never got jacked with again by anybody. That was like 8 years ago.

 

[mc01svt]

To me, I would rather just shut my mouth and get arrested and then get a good lawyer and file a suit against the officer and the department for "unlawful arrest". Who cares how unlawful the arrest is when you are dead because you gave the officer a reason.

agreed, Me personally its, "yes-sir/no-sir, have a good day sir" and get the stop over as quickly as possible. I rather get a ticket or go to jail quietly than get beaten/tazed/shot. oke: Gotta choose your battles wisely

But at the same time there always needs to be checks and balances. No one should have ABSOLUTE power and no consequences if that power is used in-appropriately.

 

[black99lightnin]

agreed, Me personally its, "yes-sir/no-sir, have a good day sir" and get the stop over as quickly as possible. I rather get a ticket or go to jail quietly than get beaten/tazed/shot. oke: Gotta choose your battles wisely

But at the same time there always needs to be checks and balances. No one should have ABSOLUTE power and no consequences if that power is used in-appropriately.

This. Be done with it. My wife on the otherhand wanted to debate the speed limit with the LEO, she's lucky she only got the original ticket for 65 in a 55.

On the side of the road is not where you want to have a dispute about a LEO's authority. It will not end well for the civilian.

 

[Machdup1]

No one should have ABSOLUTE power and no consequences if that power is used in-appropriately.

No one has absolute power and there are always consequences for misuse of power. The myth of the all powerful officer is just that, a myth. Ask any LEO if they think they are all powerful and can act without consequences. They will look at you like you are crazy. It is currently politically expedient to protray officers in that light.

If an LEO gives you an unlawful order you may politely refuse; however, if they insist, you would be wise to submit and then sue/report them later using the established process to make you whole. That being said, if you do refuse a command, you had better be correct in your understanding of the law or it will not go well for you.

Just because you think or want a command to be unlawful, doesn't make it unlawful.

 

[Sn95Snake]

agreed, Me personally its, "yes-sir/no-sir, have a good day sir" and get the stop over as quickly as possible. I rather get a ticket or go to jail quietly than get beaten/tazed/shot. oke: Gotta choose your battles wisely

I agree with this part, it is just so much easier to cooperate.

 

[Lt. ZO6]

Does anyone here have a clear understanding of the validity of "legally" resisting an unlawful arrest? :shrug:

There seems to be 2 intrepretations that are completely on opposite sides of the spectrum.

A. LEOs in the field have basically unlimited arrest powers, do not resist under any circumstances. :nono: Doing so will result in an sequence of escalating amount of force including lethal. Even if the original interaction was stemming from a minor none-violent civil offense or a case of mistaken identity. In addition LEOS and federal agents are shielded from unlawful arrest lawsuits per qualified immunity.

B. An unlawful arrest/detention is an assault and citizens have a right to defend themselves and/or escape from the officer per U.S. constitution.

You really should continue reading past the information you posted, as it is severely outdated and following it could lead one to a heap of trouble.

There are only a few states which grant an individual the ability to resist an unlawful arrest.

By the way, guess who gets to decide if it was an unlawful arrest? The courts, not the individual, so if you live in a state which allows it, you better be right.

 

[mc01svt]

No one has absolute power and there are always consequences for misuse of power.

Not absolute, but the ability to stop, detain, arrest and hold in a cell for 2.5 days without cause other than they had a bad day, wife isnt putting out,...etc is ALOT of power.

In a small town like Yemassee, SC on a friday evening the sheriff deputies could take you in for next to nothing if you get on their bad side. If you are lucky the probate judge may or may not even show up til the next monday around 10am.

civilians have bad days too and alot of people have been arrested and lost their jobs for literally nothing.

 

[motoman991]

It doesn't matter because cops will still do whatever they please and get away with it.

You resist arrest.
Cop "fears for his life" and shoots you.
You're dead.
Cop gets a paid vacation thanks to us tax-payers.

 

[Machdup1]

Not absolute, but the ability to stop, detain, arrest and hold in a cell for 2.5 days without cause other than they had a bad day, wife isnt putting out,...etc is ALOT of power.

In a small town like Yemassee, SC on a friday evening the sheriff deputies could take you in for next to nothing if you get on their bad side. If you are lucky the probate judge may or may not even show up til the next monday around 10am.

civilians have bad days too and alot of people have been arrested and lost their jobs for literally nothing.

OK, so what. Please cite examples and stop with the generalities.

 

[shurur]

I could give the example of my case for this. But I'm not interested is sharing/arguing my case with anonymous posters.

RA charges are add on charges used to dirty/scare the defendant should the defendant seek to go to trial. Often they are dropped. It's not worth dealing with them outside of court or at the scene....especially when LE owns the entire scene..especially with no cameras.....better to wait for a trial where it is your word and integrity against all of theirs.
Juries are very good at sussing out the truth...provided they are allowed to hear the whole truth and are fully informed as to their rights as jurors....that is, their right to not believe a word LE says and decide the charges are BS, AND ANNUL.

 

[jlm961]

It depends on the circumstances and severity, but with a good defense attorney a lot of petty crap never makes it to the courtroom. In my instance above the whole thing was dropped before the court date arrived. Even in some more serious cases I have seen charges amended down to basically a slap on the wrist. Like I mentioned above remain civil about the situation and leave the arguing to the prosecutor and your attorney. If you feel you were wrongly detained or harassed/assaulted, a good lawyer will advise on how to proceed.

 

[Deceptive]

It doesn't matter because cops will still do whatever they please and get away with it.

You resist arrest.
Cop "fears for his life" and shoots you.
You're dead.
Cop gets a paid vacation thanks to us tax-payers.

Criminals think they can get away with everything because of the liberals in this country making criminals into victims and those who stand up against criminals (victims) into criminals.

 

[Coiled03]

Is it too much to ask to not be unlawfully detained/arrested in the first place?

Jesus Christ you guys have seriously low standards of behavior.

 

[Blown 89]

There's a subforum for this shit you know.

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?61-Donut-Shop

 

[SolarYellow]

Seems like you need to shutup and get arrested and make a call to your lawyer. But in Sandra Bland's case, Im not so sure thats a good idea.

The woman acted like a smart ass child and although the cop is getting the attention, I think the female should be getting some scrutiny. Act like a jackass to a cop or no cop, you're going to be treated as such.

 

[svtfocus2cobra]

My issue is a mistaken address while issuing a warrant. It has happened and if someone busts through my door when I know I have done nothing wrong then Im going to arm myself and protect myself. In doing so, I know the ending outcome is probably death if you shoot anyone in law enforcement. The tactics are to just keep coming and keep pushing if you meet force until that force is suppressed. So you essentially have two forces thinking they are just protecting themselves, and then in the end when a few people have been killed you realize there was a mistake. Where is the recourse for this?

 

[Deceptive]

My issue is a mistaken address while issuing a warrant. It has happened and if someone busts through my door when I know I have done nothing wrong then Im going to arm myself and protect myself. In doing so, I know the ending outcome is probably death if you shoot anyone in law enforcement. The tactics are to just keep coming and keep pushing if you meet force until that force is suppressed. So you essentially have two forces thinking they are just protecting themselves, and then in the end when a few people have been killed you realize there was a mistake. Where is the recourse for this?

This just happened, where the police executed a warrant at the wrong address or they were given a wrong address. The occupant killed an officer. He was arrested, and was found not guilty. The courts said that it is the job of the officers to assure they are issuing the warrant at the correct address and that the resident was within his rights to eliminate a perceived threat.