MCL § 750.81d – Assaulting, battering, resisting, obstructing, opposing person performing duty (felony)
Table of Contents
Code Details
THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 328 of 1931
Exact Statute Text
Click to view the complete statute text
Sec. 81d.(1) Except as provided in subsections (2), (3), and (4), an individual who assaults, batters, wounds, resists, obstructs, opposes, or endangers a person who the individual knows or has reason to know is performing his or her duties is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both.
(2) An individual who assaults, batters, wounds, resists, obstructs, opposes, or endangers a person who the individual knows or has reason to know is performing his or her duties causing a bodily injury requiring medical attention or medical care to that person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.
(3) An individual who assaults, batters, wounds, resists, obstructs, opposes, or endangers a person who the individual knows or has reason to know is performing his or her duties causing a serious impairment of a body function of that person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 15 years or a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both.
(4) An individual who assaults, batters, wounds, resists, obstructs, opposes, or endangers a person who the individual knows or has reason to know is performing his or her duties causing the death of that person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $20,000.00, or both.
(5) This section does not prohibit an individual from being charged with, convicted of, or punished for any other violation of law that is committed by that individual while violating this section.
(6) A term of imprisonment imposed for a violation of this section may run consecutively to any term of imprisonment imposed for another violation arising from the same transaction.
(7) As used in this section:
(a) “Obstruct” includes the use or threatened use of physical interference or force or a knowing failure to comply with a lawful command.
(b) “Person” means any of the following:
(i) A police officer of this state or of a political subdivision of this state including, but not limited to, a motor carrier officer or capitol security officer of the department of state police.
(ii) A police officer of a junior college, college, or university who is authorized by the governing board of that junior college, college, or university to enforce state law and the rules and ordinances of that junior college, college, or university.
(iii) A conservation officer of the department of natural resources or the department of environmental quality.
(iv) A conservation officer of the United States department of the interior.
(v) A sheriff or deputy sheriff.
(vi) A constable.
(vii) A peace officer of a duly authorized police agency of the United States, including, but not limited to, an agent of the secret service or department of justice.
(viii) A firefighter.
(ix) Any emergency medical service personnel described in section 20950 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.20950.
(x) An individual engaged in a search and rescue operation as that term is defined in section 50c.
(c) “Serious impairment of a body function” means that term as defined in section 58c of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.58c.
MCL § 750.81d Summary
This Michigan statute outlines the felony offense of assaulting, battering, resisting, obstructing, opposing, or endangering a person who is performing their official duties. It applies to individuals who commit these acts against specific public servants, including police officers, firefighters, emergency medical personnel, and certain other authorized officials. The severity of the penalties increases significantly based on the level of harm caused to the person performing their duties. These acts can range from simply resisting a lawful command to causing serious injury or even death, with corresponding increases in potential imprisonment time and fines. The law also clarifies that a conviction under this section does not prevent charges for other crimes committed during the same incident, and sentences for such related offenses can run consecutively.
Purpose of MCL § 750.81d
The legislative intent behind this Michigan penal code section is to provide enhanced protection for individuals who are performing vital public safety and service duties. It recognizes that these professionals—such as police officers, firefighters, and paramedics—often face dangerous situations and require specific legal safeguards while carrying out their responsibilities. By deterring assaults, resistance, and obstruction, the statute aims to ensure that public servants can perform their jobs effectively and safely, ultimately benefiting public order and safety. The escalating penalties tied to the level of harm inflicted underscore the state’s commitment to prosecuting those who interfere with or injure these essential personnel. This specific statute addresses the problem of individuals knowingly hindering or harming those authorized to enforce laws, provide emergency aid, or maintain order.
Real-World Example of MCL § 750.81d
Imagine a scenario where a police officer responds to a noise complaint at a late-night party. Upon arrival, the officer attempts to speak with the homeowner, John. John, visibly intoxicated and agitated, starts yelling at the officer, demanding they leave. When the officer tries to explain the complaint, John pushes the officer’s chest, telling them they “can’t tell him what to do.” The officer then attempts to place John under arrest for disorderly conduct. John pulls his arms away, struggles, and tries to run back into his house, forcing the officer to physically restrain him. During the struggle, the officer sustains a minor scrape on their arm.
In this instance, John could be charged under MCL § 750.81d. He “assaulted” (pushed) and “resisted” (pulled away, struggled) a person (the police officer) whom he knew or had reason to know was performing official duties. Since the officer sustained a minor scrape not requiring significant medical attention, John would likely face charges under subsection (1), which carries a potential penalty of up to 2 years imprisonment or a $2,000 fine, or both. If the officer had sustained a broken bone requiring surgery, John could be charged under subsection (3), leading to much more severe penalties.
Related Statutes
While MCL § 750.81d specifically addresses actions against public servants, it can be related to other general criminal statutes depending on the circumstances of the incident:
- MCL § 750.81 – Assault and Battery: This is the general statute for simple assault and battery in Michigan, which involves either an attempted battery or an unlawful touching with intent to injure. While MCL § 750.81d covers specific victims, the underlying act of assault or battery is similar, but the specialized statute carries harsher penalties due to the victim’s status.
- MCL § 750.81a – Assault and Infliction of Serious Injury: This statute addresses assaults where serious injury is inflicted without a weapon. An incident that falls under MCL § 750.81d involving serious injury would likely be prosecuted under the more specific and often more severe penalties of MCL § 750.81d subsections (3) or (4).
- MCL § 750.479 – Failure to Obey a Lawful Order of a Police Officer: This statute deals with the failure to stop for a police officer’s signal. While distinct from the active resistance or obstruction described in MCL § 750.81d, both relate to an individual’s compliance with law enforcement.
Case Law Interpreting MCL § 750.81d
Michigan courts have frequently interpreted MCL § 750.81d to clarify its elements, particularly “obstruct,” “resist,” and “performing his or her duties.”
- [People v. Vasquez, 303 Mich. App. 33]: This case, among others, has helped define what constitutes “obstruction” under the statute, clarifying that it includes not just physical acts but also a knowing failure to comply with a lawful command. This interpretation broadens the scope beyond just active physical resistance.
- [People v. Corridor, 128 Mich. App. 219]: This case delves into the “reason to know” element, discussing how the prosecution must prove that the defendant knew or had objective reason to believe the person was performing their duties. This can often involve examining the officer’s uniform, marked vehicle, or verbal identification.
For more information, you can search for these cases on Google Scholar by clicking the links provided.
Why MCL § 750.81d Matters in Personal Injury Litigation
While MCL § 750.81d is a criminal statute, it holds significant relevance in the realm of Michigan personal injury law, particularly concerning civil claims arising from incidents involving public servants or the use of force.
For plaintiffs who are public servants, such as police officers, firefighters, or paramedics, this statute can be crucial. If an individual assaults, batters, or obstructs them while they are performing their duties, causing injury, the public servant may have a civil personal injury claim against that individual. A conviction under MCL § 750.81d provides strong evidence of the defendant’s unlawful conduct and negligence per se, simplifying the liability aspect of a subsequent civil lawsuit for damages such as medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. The criminal conviction establishes the legal wrong, making it easier for the injured public servant to pursue compensation in civil court.
Conversely, this statute is also important in cases where an individual alleges excessive force by a public servant during an arrest or interaction. While a person is legally obligated to not resist a lawful arrest, if a public servant uses unreasonable or excessive force, the individual may have a personal injury claim against the public servant or the governmental entity. In such cases, the defense might argue that the individual was violating MCL § 750.81d to justify the force used, while the plaintiff would contend that the force exceeded what was reasonably necessary to overcome the alleged resistance or obstruction. The nuances of what constitutes “obstructing” or “resisting” and the lawfulness of the public servant’s actions become central to determining liability in such civil suits, impacting both plaintiff strategy and defense arguments. Understanding the specific elements of MCL § 750.81d is therefore vital for attorneys representing clients on either side of these complex personal injury claims in Michigan.