Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentLaw Enforcement & Police · 1 decade ago

What do you think of the following points concerning arrest?

Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest

“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.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all … it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.

As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable, and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)


Diana: So, you don't like the idea at all.

Duly noted.

All arrests are lawful, correct, and the will of God. We get it.

Update 2:

Diana: Ummmm. The question was: "What do you think of the following points concerning arrests?"

You didn't notice it up at the top? . . . big bold letters? . . . question mark at the end?

4 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Umm, is there a question buried under all these cites? BTW, have you shepardized them to ensure that they really are current.

    Nevertheless, assuming that there's some point here and that these blurbs actually prove that point, what you are doing is sometimes called "head note lawyering". Legal decisons, rulings and such are recorded in bound volumes called reporters (the citattions you provided are for reporters). before computers allowed for full-text searches, the companies that publish reporters came up with a nifty way of locating cases based on their legal issues - boil down the most relevant summaries of the legal points of the decision and thebn post them at the beginning so that you can get an idea of what the decision is about before plunging in. As an added bonus, the publisher then indexes all these head notes into digests by topic so they can be researched. The problem is that a head note is basically an excerpt and as such is not supposed to substitute for the decision itself - which would involve a recitation of the facts (which controls what's relevant) and the procedural status (which controls what the reviewing court can comment on). Your excerpts don't say anything - just blurbs that can apply to anything.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I like the way you did your research very thurough. In all though I would not fight with the police even if you feel you are being falsley arrested. Officers have a legal right to take away your liberty. If you fight the officer I doubt you will be able to claim one of these laws unless its a very corrupt department. One of those that deals with coming to the aid of a person. That would be a large mistake. That person may or may not know what the arrest is being for. If they interfiered they can be arrested for interfearing.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    In examining the climate of the crime, i think of the state has to coach some variety of economic or economic income from impersonating somebody. stepping right into a club won't decrease it. communicate on your attorney or public defender to study the climate of this crime. possibly there is yet another regulation like possession of a pretend id or something. maximum states have that comparable regulation meant to stay away from under age persons from utilising different ids. its generally a misdemeanor and usually is dealt with as an infraction.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Slick
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    I find them very interesting. Certainly these are isolated cases and not some crack head who "thinks hes innocent" and resisting. But basically a cop who basically abuses his/her power to arrest someone unlawfully and the arrestee not putting up with it and fighting back.

    Good read..thanks!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.