Facts: The jury convicted the defendant of assault and battery on a police officer and resisting arrest. On June 10, 2010, State Trooper John Driscoll checked the license plate of an automobile in which the defendant, Frankie Portee, was a passenger. Once Trooper Driscoll realized the car failed an inspection in November 2009, he pulled over the vehicle. Trooper Driscoll noticed that the defendant was not wearing his seat belt. Trooper Driscoll proceeded to administer a citation for the violation. Before doing so, Trooper Driscoll asked the defendant for his name and date of birth. The defendant responded with false name: “Daniel Atkins.” After running the name “Daniel Atkins” through the computer, Trooper Driscoll learned that there was an active arrest warrant for the above mentioned “Daniel Atkins.”
While
Trooper Driscoll was speaking to the defendant, State Trooper Brian Gladu
arrived at the scene and conducted a pat and frisk on the defendant. The defendant then tried to flee the
scene. The defendant struck both Trooper
Driscoll and Trooper Gladu. In response,
Trooper Gladu sprayed mace on the face
of the defendant. Although the defendant
made some oral indication of compliance, he persisted in his attempts to get up
and run even after being sprayed. Eventually,
the troopers were able to gain control of the defendant, place him in handcuffs,
and put him into the back seat of the cruiser.
Issue:
Was there sufficient evidence to support the charge of resisting arrest
under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 268, § 32B?
Reasoning: Yes. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter. 268,
§32B states, “a person commits the crime of resisting arrest if he
knowingly prevents or attempts to prevent a police officer acting under color
of his official authority, from effecting an arrest of the actor or another by:
(1) using or threatening to use physical force or violence against the police
officer or another; or (2) using any other means which creates a substantial
risk of causing bodily injury to such police officer or another.” As specified
in the statute, “the crime is committed, if at all, at the time of the
effecting of an arrest.” Even though the troopers were initially performing an
inquiry to determine whether the defendant was the person subject to the
warrant and a pat frisk, the situation quickly escalated when the defendant
committed an assault and battery. The court
reasoned that once the assault and battery occurred, a reasonable person in the
defendant’s circumstances would have understood that the troopers were in the
process of effecting an arrest.
Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to support the charge of
resisting arrest under M.G.L.c. 268, § 32B.
Judgment: Affirmed
Written on 6/30/13
