Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain United States Government officers or employees is an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 111. Simple assault is a class A misdemeanor, but if physical contact occurs, the offense is a class D felony. If a deadly weapon is used or bodily injury is inflicted, it is a class C felony. [1]
[21] [22] It is not clear whether a "stop and identify" law could compel giving one's name after being arrested, although some states have laws that specifically require an arrested person to give their name and other biographical information, [23] and some state courts [24] [25] have held that refusal to give one's name constitutes obstructing ...
Instead, the court gave a jury instruction that stated that Bad Elk did not have the right to resist an arrest and that Bad Elk only had the right to resist if the arresting officers used excessive force in making the arrest. [18] The jury convicted Bad Elk and sentenced him to death. [19] His execution date was set at June 16, 1899. [20]
Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights.
Every able-bodied person above 18 years of age who neglects or refuses to join the posse comitatus or power of the county, by neglecting or refusing to aid and assist in taking or arresting any person against whom there may be issued any process, or by neglecting to aid and assist in retaking any person who, after being arrested or confined ...
The Court relied on (1) "the well-settled common-law rule that a warrantless arrest in a public place is valid if the arresting officer had probable cause to believe the suspect is a felon; (2) the clear consensus among the States adhering to that well-settled common-law rule; (3) the expression of the judgment of Congress that such an arrest ...
It is widely quoted on the internet, under the false belief that it gives citizens the right to resist an unlawful arrest by force, including deadly force. The full citation is Plummer v. State , 135 Ind. 308, 34 N.E. 968 (1893).
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that an objective reasonableness standard should apply to a civilian's claim that law enforcement officials used excessive force in the course of making an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of his or her person.