Opinion ID: 897660
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Preventing Arrest or Discharge of Other Duties

Text: [¶24] The jury found Barth guilty of preventing arrest or discharge of other duties, in violation of N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02, which provides: 1. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if, with intent to prevent a public servant from effecting an arrest of himself or another for a misdemeanor or infraction, or from discharging any other official duty, he creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to the public servant or to anyone except himself, or employs means justifying or requiring substantial force to overcome resistance to effecting the arrest or the discharge of the duty. A person is guilty of a class C felony if, with intent to prevent a public servant from effecting an arrest of himself or another for a class A, B, or C felony, he creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to the public servant or to anyone except himself, or employs means justifying or requiring substantial force to overcome resistance to effecting such an arrest. 2. It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that the public servant was not acting lawfully, but it is no defense that the defendant mistakenly believed that the public servant was not acting lawfully. A public servant executing a warrant or other process in good faith and under color of law shall be deemed to be acting lawfully. [¶25] Barth argues there was not sufficient evidence to convict him of preventing arrest or other discharge of duties because the State failed to submit evidence showing Sheriff Hilliard was acting lawfully when he arrested Barth for disorderly conduct. Barth contends that because Sheriff Hilliard did not have a warrant for his arrest or a court order ordering him off the land, no legal basis existed for the disorderly conduct arrest. Therefore, Barth asserts the conviction for preventing arrest or discharge of other duties should be overturned under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02(2). [¶26] Unlawful police conduct is a statutory defense in a prosecution for preventing arrest or discharge of other duties but it is not a defense if the defendant mistakenly believed the public servant was acting unlawfully. State v. Mathre, 2004 ND 149, ¶ 9, 683 N.W.2d 918; N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02(2). Unlawful police conduct is not an absolute defense to a preventing arrest charge, and a defendant is allowed to resist only excessive force used to effect an arrest. Id.; see also N.D.C.C. § 12.1-05-03(1). [¶27] Here, Sheriff Hilliard was acting lawfully when he placed Barth under arrest for disorderly conduct. Section 29-06-15, N.D.C.C., provides: 1. A law enforcement officer, without a warrant, may arrest a person: a. For a public offense, committed or attempted in the officer's presence; and for the purpose of this subdivision, a crime must be deemed committed or attempted in the officer's presence when what the officer observes through the officer's senses reasonably indicates to the officer that a crime was in fact committed or attempted in the officer's presence by the person arrested. The term public offense includes disorderly conduct. Mathre, 2004 ND 149, ¶ 12, 683 N.W.2d 918. Therefore, because Barth committed disorderly conduct in Sheriff Hilliard's presence, Sheriff Hilliard was acting lawfully when he arrested him. [¶28] A person is guilty of preventing arrest or discharge of other duties if, with intent to prevent a public servant from effecting an arrest of himself or another for a misdemeanor . . . he creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to the public servant or to anyone except himself, or employs means justifying or requiring substantial force to overcome resistance to effecting the arrest or the discharge of the duty. N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02(1). Sufficient evidence shows Barth created a substantial risk of bodily injury to Sheriff Hilliard and substantial force was required to overcome Barth's resistance to effecting the arrest. See N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02(1). David Bueligen testified Barth swung at [Sheriff Hilliard] once or two times for sure. Sheriff Hilliard testified that, when he told Barth he was placing him under arrest, Barth put up both fists and swung and [Barth] grazed the side of [the sheriff's] face. After wrestling Barth to the ground he was trying to kick [the sheriff]. Officer Schmitz testified Barth took a swing at [Sheriff Hilliard] and swung a couple more times when the sheriff attempted to arrest him. [¶29] Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude the jury could reasonably have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Barth committed preventing arrest or discharge of other duties in violation of N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02.