WebIts broadly described as a willful resist, delay, or obstruction of a law enforcement officer or emergency medical technician (EMT) performing their duties. 230, 656 S.E.2d 873 (2008); Sillah v. State, 291 Ga. App. What does the charge of obstruction mean? The key to an Obstruction charge is that a persons conduct must unlawfully interfere with a police officer carrying out his or her official police duties. A persons actions must violate the law to fall within the definition of Obstruction. denied, 543 U.S. 988, 125 S. Ct. 507, 160 L. Ed. - Trial court properly denied the defendant's motion to suppress the contraband found on the defendant's person as a result of a traffic stop that came to fruition after an officer observed the defendant making a U-turn in front of a recently robbed bank because the defendant admitted to having a knife in the defendant's pocket but refused to remove the defendant's hand therefrom. 204, 410 S.E.2d 799 (1991); Hall v. State, 201 Ga. App. 798, 665 S.E.2d 896 (2008). Requested jury instruction on an unlawful arrest claim incorrectly stated the law; a statement that a detainee was not required to respond to an officer's questions was contrary to Georgia law as failure to identify oneself could constitute obstruction. 137, 633 S.E.2d 439 (2006). 682, 523 S.E.2d 610 (1999). 16-10-24(a) as the officer was in the lawful discharge of official duties when the officer asked the juvenile to stop in order to investigate the possibility of truancy pursuant to O.C.G.A. 668, 716 S.E.2d 772 (2011); Foster v. State, 314 Ga. App. Evidence was sufficient to convict a defendant of attempting to remove a firearm from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A. Gibbs v. State, 255 Ga. App. 689, 423 S.E.2d 427 (1992); Hardwick v. State, 210 Ga. App. 294, 690 S.E.2d 675 (2010). - Because the defendant decided to pursue an "all or nothing" defense, the trial court did not err in making the decision to not charge the jury on misdemeanor obstruction, sua sponte, as such would have undermined that defense. Obstructing a Police Officer section 89(2) Police Act 1996 It is a summary only offence carrying a maximum penalty of one months imprisonment and/or a level 3 Glispie v. State, 335 Ga. App. 73 (2017). 58, 673 S.E.2d 558 (2009), overruled on other grounds, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 22 (Ga. 2019). Duitsman v. State, 212 Ga. App. - Because the defendant was neither indicted nor tried for felony obstruction of justice, the court did not err in refusing to give the requested charge that an accomplice was the one who was present at the commission of a crime, aiding and abetting the perpetrator, or an accessory before the fact; moreover, the court's own charge, which included pattern charges on parties to a crime, knowledge, mere presence at the scene of a crime, and mere association with others committing a crime, substantially covered the same legal principles as the requested charge. Evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of misdemeanor obstruction of a law enforcement officer because, by resisting the officers as the officers performed the officers' duty of investigating the domestic disturbance call, the defendant obstructed or hindered the officers. Lammerding v. State, 255 Ga. App. "; in subsection (b), in the first sentence, inserted "jailer," near the beginning, substituted "person shall be guilty" for "person is guilty" in the middle, inserted "a first" and inserted "year" near the end, and added the second and third sentences; and added subsections (c) and (d). 38, 648 S.E.2d 656 (2007). Evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for misdemeanor obstruction of an officer as the captain stated the captain was a law enforcement officer while displaying a badge and informed the defendant that the captain was acting on behalf of the property owners, authorizing the jury to conclude that the defendant had the requisite knowledge of the captain's identity, and testimony that the captain directed the defendant to stop filming or leave three times and told the defendant that failure to comply would result in an arrest before the captain forced the defendant from the venue while the defendant struggled authorized the jury to conclude that the defendant was given adequate time to comply. In the Interest of M.M., 287 Ga. App. An officer's testimony that a juvenile defendant assumed a "fighting stance," placed the defendant's fists in front of the defendant's face, and yelled obscenities at officers while refusing to obey the officers' commands was sufficient to show that the defendant "offered to do violence" to the officers under O.C.G.A. Dukes v. State, 275 Ga. App. 24-14-8), it could rely solely on the deputy's account of the events. 1290. Draper v. Reynolds, 369 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. However, if you are convicted of willfully obstructing a law enforcement officer during his official duties, it is a misdemeanor. 731, 688 S.E.2d 650 (2009). Webct.2 : willful obstruction of law enforcement officers - misdemeanor ct.3 : driving while license suspended or revoked ct.4 : giving false name, address, or birthdate to law - Inmate's obstruction of a correctional officer conviction was upheld on appeal, based on sufficient evidence describing how the officer was attacked and the extent of the officer's injuries suffered at the hand of the inmate, and testimony from one of the officer's responding to the altercation describing the altercation; hence, the evidence sufficiently supported the jury's rejection of the inmate's self-defense claim. Steillman v. State, 295 Ga. App. Christopher Lawrence McMillion Violation of Probation (x3) Danny Eugene Singletary VOP Hold for Harris Cited in Shaw v. Jones, 226 Ga. 291, 174 S.E.2d 444 (1970); Shaw v. State, 121 Ga. App. 847, 512 S.E.2d 650 (1999). Hambrick v. State, 242 Ga. App. 137, 648 S.E.2d 699 (2007). 252, 836 S.E.2d 541 (2019). 668, 538 S.E.2d 759 (2000); Shaw v. State, 247 Ga. App. United States v. Virden, 417 F. Supp. Sworn reserve officer with arrest powers was a "law enforcement officer" within the meaning of O.C.G.A. Use of citizens' band (CB) radios as violation of state law, 87 A.L.R.3d 83. - Public college's chief of police who objected to the college administration's directive that the chief of police speak with the district attorney about having the charges against a suspected laptop thief dropped reasonably believed that the chief was objecting to illegal conduct, obstruction of justice under O.C.G.A. - Fact that the indictment used the word "fighting" did not require the state to prove the defendant physically fought with the officer; it was enough to show the defendant verbally threatened the officer and acted in opposition to the officer's authority by wielding a tire iron. Web16-10-24(b) - willful obstruction of law enforcement officers by use of threats or violence - f 16-10-24(a) - willful obstruction of law enforcement officers - m: din: x0057861 name: hendry, dennis calvin birth date: 04/11/1973 race: b Alfred v. Powell, F. Supp. Williams v. State, 289 Ga. App. Given evidence from an ensuing police officer identifying the defendant as the driver of the vehicle stopped, and because the jury was the judge of the credibility of the witnesses presented at trial, and was authorized to reject the defendant's alibi defense, sufficient evidence was presented to support the defendant's convictions for reckless driving, failure to maintain a lane, driving with defective equipment, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, and obstruction of a police officer. 539, 571 S.E.2d 529 (2002); Penland v. State, 258 Ga. App. - 58 Am. State-wide alert system established, 35-3-191. Additionally, it was not necessary to introduce the city ordinance on disorderly conduct in order to convict. Libri v. State, 346 Ga. App. The jury could find that when the defendant elbowed the chief in the course of the pat-down, the defendant committed felony obstruction in violation of O.C.G.A. When a defendant fought an officer during an attempted detention for an investigative stop, the officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant for obstruction of an officer under O.C.G.A. 16-7-24, for which defendant was convicted; a comparison of these two offenses shows that they have entirely different elements and require proof of entirely different facts. Upon a third or subsequent conviction for a violation of this subsection, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years nor more than 15 years. - After the officer arrived at the scene and tried for two to three minutes to persuade the defendant to calm down, but the defendant persisted in defendant's verbal barrage of obscenities and insults addressed to defendant's spouse and the police, it was this interference with the officer's attempt to maintain the peace that formed the basis for the officer's ultimate decision to arrest the defendant for misdemeanor obstruction, and the fact that the officer delayed the officer's decision until the defendant retreated to the apartment, and continued to disrupt the peace (eventually producing a crowd of 60 to 80 onlookers) did not detract from the propriety of that basis for arrest. Upon a second conviction for a violation of this subsection, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years nor more than ten years. 668, 344 S.E.2d 490 (1986). WebWhen a law enforcement officer is prevented from conducting his official duties, Georgia considers it the crime of obstruction. 807, 534 S.E.2d 487 (2000); Patterson v. State, 244 Ga. App. Fricks v. State, 210 Ga. App. Because direct eyewitness testimony from three eyewitnesses supported a finding that defendant struck a correctional officer while that officer was attempting to handcuff defendant, this evidence was sufficient to sustain defendant's conviction of felony obstruction of an officer. Jennings v. State, 285 Ga. App. Davis v. State, 288 Ga. App. The charge as a whole adequately covered the principle of law and allowed the defendant to argue that the defendant should have been acquitted because the state proved only disagreement or remonstrance. Appx. 178, 369 S.E.2d 798 (1988); Patterson v. State, 191 Ga. App. 16-4-1 (attempt),16-6-4 (child molestation),16-6-5 (enticement of a child), and16-10-24 (obstruction). - Evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for obstruction of a law enforcement officer, as the state proved defendant committed the obstruction act knowingly and willfully, and that the officer was lawfully discharging the officer's duties at the time of the obstruction; the state was not also required to prove the underlying offense. - Criminal trespass count of a defendant's indictment was sufficient because the indictment alleged that the defendant was attempting to elude and hide from a police officer when the defendant committed the trespass, which was a crime under O.C.G.A. 16-10-24, was proper because in both the similar transaction and the incident leading to the charges being tried, the defendant was arrested in possession of cocaine and "sale-sized" baggies after seeking to avoid police; the trial court also gave an instruction that the similar transaction evidence was limited to the purpose of showing the defendant's bent of mind in committing the charged offenses. 569, 711 S.E.2d 86 (2011). 691, 78 S.E. 479, 657 S.E.2d 531 (2008), cert. - In a 42 U.S.C. Loudly playing a car radio in the early morning hours and quarreling with police officers was sufficient to constitute boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A. 137, 633 S.E.2d 439 (2006). Jamaarques Omaurion Cripps Terroristic Tankersley v. State, 155 Ga. App. - Because all evidence showed that obstruction offense occurred at the location of the stop and arrest in a particular city, but there was no evidence that the location was within Glynn County as charged, the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that venue for the offense was properly laid in Glynn County; accordingly, defendant's conviction for misdemeanor obstruction of a law enforcement officer required reversal. 346, 606 S.E.2d 869 (2004), overruled on other grounds, Stryker v. State, 297 Ga. App. 24-9-84.1(a)(1) (see now O.C.G.A. 1983. 16-10-24(b). 286, 581 S.E.2d 313 (2003). 761, 669 S.E.2d 735 (2008). Edwards v. State, 308 Ga. App. 471, 577 S.E.2d 288 (2003). - When police officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant for simple assault, the fact that the defendant was ultimately acquitted of the simple assault did not invalidate the arrest or the defendant's charge and conviction for felony obstruction of law enforcement officers in violation of O.C.G.A. Sharp v. State, 275 Ga. App. 760, 500 S.E.2d 627 (1998); Wilson v. State, 233 Ga. App. Thompson v. State, 259 Ga. App. Trial court did not err in denying a defendant juvenile's motion for a directed verdict and in adjudicating the defendant delinquent on an obstruction charge because an officer working as a security guard at a restaurant was engaged in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties at the time of the officer's encounter with the defendant as required by O.C.G.A. 423, 677 S.E.2d 439 (2009). It was unnecessary to show that the passenger's eye was permanently rendered useless. Because it was the function of the jury to determine the credibility of witnesses and weigh any conflict in the evidence, the testimony of a single witness is generally sufficient to establish a fact; therefore, the testimony of the police officer who was involved in the altercation with the defendant was sufficient evidence for the jury to convict the defendant. Taylor v. Freeman, F.3d (11th Cir. Johnson v. State, 330 Ga. App. Man charged with making terroristic 511, 583 S.E.2d 172 (2003). Police officer had both actual and arguable probable cause to arrest a suspect for making terroristic threats under O.C.G.A. When an officer arrested the defendant based on information from another officer that the defendant had been arguing with his ex-girlfriend and broke glass at the ex-girlfriend's house, and the officer observed a fresh, bleeding wound on the defendant's hand, caused by his beating on the ex-girlfriend's door, the officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant for disorderly conduct, following which defendant's attack on the officer allowed a conviction for obstruction of a law enforcement officer. Cooper v. State, 350 Ga. App. 16-10-24) was meant to cover obstruction of law enforcement officers in general by use of violence, threat of violence, or other unlawful means. Ewumi v. State, 315 Ga. App. 670, 327 S.E.2d 745 (1985); Sapp v. State, 179 Ga. App. Spruell v. Harper, F. Supp. Reed v. State, 205 Ga. App. Evidence was sufficient to support a defendant's conviction for felony obstruction of a law enforcement officer in violation of O.C.G.A. Tate v. State, 289 Ga. App. 16-2-6 to infer from the circumstances that the defendant both knowingly and willfully obstructed the deputy by the use of violence and intended to cause the deputy serious bodily injury by striking the deputy with a fist, and under former O.C.G.A. You're all set! 746, 660 S.E.2d 841 (2008). 98-832, Obstruction of Justice Under Federal Law: A Review of Some of the Elements. 16-10-24 was not authorized. 763, 490 S.E.2d 442 (1997); Basu v. State, 228 Ga. App. An obstruction of justice charge can be at either the federal or state levels, depending on what has been interfered with. Criminal liability for obstructing process as affected by invalidity or irregularity of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 1146. - Following the state agreeing to dismiss the RICO and theft charges against the defendant in exchange for a guilty plea to one misdemeanor count of hindering and obstructing a law enforcement officer conditioned upon the defendant testifying truthfully at the trial against the co-defendants, the trial court erred by imposing a sentence upon the defendant which differed from the understood terms of the negotiated plea. Brown v. State, 240 Ga. App. Construction with O.C.G.A. 16-10-24(b). WebObstructing or hindering law enforcement officers (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Code section, a person who knowingly and willfully obstructs or Mitchell v. State, 312 Ga. App. 16-10-24(b) since the issue of whether the police officers provided inconsistent testimony was for the jury to decide, the defendant admitted that the defendant knew that the individual who defendant struck was a police officer, there was no requirement of proving actual injury as an element of the offense, and the officers were in lawful discharge of their duties at the time of the alleged obstruction because the officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant on a probation violation warrant; upon the officer approaching the defendant, the defendant fled and the defendant struggled, punched, and hit the officers as the officers tried to arrest the defendant. 16-10-24(a) when the defendant refused to obey commands to return to the defendant's vehicle while the officer was attempting to investigate a DUI in another vehicle containing a driver and three passengers. For article, "Police Pursuits: A Comprehensive Look at the Broad Spectrum of Police Pursuit Liability and Law," see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 751, 270 S.E.2d 38 (1980); Jenga v. State, 166 Ga. App. Hampton v. State, 287 Ga. App. Maintenance of records by Georgia Crime Information Center regarding violations of O.C.G.A. With regard to a defendant's convictions for improper lane change, serious injury by vehicle while driving under the influence, and misdemeanor obstruction of an officer, there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions based on the state disproving the defendant's affirmative defense of accident that the bad weather and alleged malfunctioning brakes caused the single-car crash, an officer's testimony that the defendant attempted to leave the scene several times, and the evidence of the defendant's vehicle passenger suffering a severe injury to the left eye after the eye was forced out of the eye socket. Willful Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officers-Felony: 11/17/2019 12:50 AM: 3/8/2021: PLED GUILTY ON CHGS: 3/8/2021: Felony: Completed: 4: Willful Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officers-Felony: 11/17/2019 12:50 AM: 3/8/2021: PLED GUILTY ON CHGS: 3/8/2021: Felony: Completed: 3: Willful Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officers An officer arrested the defendant, whose vehicle was stopped on a road, for refusing to comply with the officer's order to leave the area. 16-10-24). Williams v. State, 196 Ga. App. 772, 792 S.E.2d 732 (2016), overruled on other grounds by Collier v. State, 834 S.E.2d 769, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 708 (Ga. 2019). 456, 571 S.E.2d 456 (2002). Moccia v. State, 174 Ga. App. - After the defendant was convicted for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, the federal district court did not err by applying sentencing enhancements under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) because the defendant had three qualifying predicate offenses; two convictions for felony obstruction and a conviction for selling cocaine. - There was no evidence that the arresting officer assaulted defendant first, but the appellate court concluded that the evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of obstruction of an officer by refusing to obey the officer's lawful commands and by striking the officer in the face. Defendant's conviction for misdemeanor obstruction of a law enforcement officer, in violation of O.C.G.A. Although the defendant fled at the sight of the police, there was no evidence that the officers called out to the defendant to halt or that defendant failed to submit to a show of lawful authority; therefore, conviction under O.C.G.A. - In a parent's tort action arising from an accusation by store employees that the parent's child stole from the store, the trial court properly refused to strike evidence of an employee's conviction for violating O.C.G.A. - In a prosecution for obstructing a law enforcement officer, it was reversible error for the trial court to give the jury a definition of "offering violence" containing a reference to threats of violence since there was no evidence that defendant used verbal threats. 757, 833 S.E.2d 142 (2019). This offense is most frequently called Resisting and Obstructing an Officer. 16-10-24(b) conviction for felony obstruction of a police officer after the officer tried to arrest the defendant on an outstanding warrant and after the officer was identified and ordered defendant to stop, the defendant struck and kicked the police officer as the defendant attempted to flee. Andrews v. State, 307 Ga. App. 16-10-24(a) misdemeanor obstruction of an officer. 518, 577 S.E.2d 839 (2003). Griffin v. State, 281 Ga. App. 37, 640 S.E.2d 652 (2006), overruled on other grounds, Ferrell v. Mikula, 295 Ga. App. - In a lawful arrest based upon probable cause, an officer has the right to use that force reasonably necessary to effect the arrest, and the defendant does not have the right to resist the use of such reasonable force. Lemarr v. State, 188 Ga. App. Pugh v. State, 280 Ga. App. Jur. You're all set! Moreover, the trial court properly excluded a letter that the defendant claimed explained or justified the aforementioned actions as irrelevant. 16-10-24. 16-10-20 and 16-10-24 did not define the same offense, did not address the same criminal conduct, and there was no ambiguity created by different punishments being set forth for the same crime; hence, the rule of lenity did not apply. One cannot be guilty of offense of hindering an officer unless that person knew official character of officer. 148, 294 S.E.2d 365 (1982). 688, 385 S.E.2d 772 (1989); Gordon v. State, 199 Ga. App. 16-10-24, although there was no evidence that the defendant offered or threatened violence. 879, 583 S.E.2d 922 (2003). 27, 656 S.E.2d 161 (2007). Evidence indicating that while officers were attempting to arrest the defendant in a domestic dispute, the defendant, after intentionally striking the victim one last time, intentionally punched one of the officers and then, intentionally or accidentally, struck the other with an elbow, was sufficient to support convictions for felony obstruction of a law enforcement officer and simple battery. 16-10-20 could only be considered a misdemeanor, because the acts alleged met the definition of misdemeanor obstruction of a police officer, as both O.C.G.A. Williams v. State, 196 Ga. App. 308, 398 S.E.2d 292 (1990), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, 205 Ga. App. Sufficient evidence supported defendant's conviction for misdemeanor obstruction of a police officer as the evidence showed that following the traffic stop of defendant's vehicle, defendant, who was handcuffed, fled the scene, requiring that officers pursue and apprehend defendant. 16-10-24 as defendant did not make a specific request that the phrase be defined, and the trial court fully and accurately charged the jury on the statutory definition of the crime charged. 482, 669 S.E.2d 477 (2008). In an armed robbery prosecution, defense counsel was not deficient in not requesting jury charges on the law of abandonment and accessory after-the-fact as there was no evidence that the defendant abandoned the crime before an overt act occurred or that the defendant was an accessory after the fact rather than a party to the robbery. 2013)(Unpublished). - Contrary to the defendant's claim, police officers were lawfully discharging their official duties when the officers responded to a 911 call by the defendant's mother regarding the defendant's suicidal and erratic behavior and, thus, the evidence supported the defendant's conviction for obstructing law enforcement. Recent arrests around the county. Because a high school principal told a school security officer to be on the lookout for a juvenile who was skipping class and would be involved in an after-school fight, the officer was engaged in the lawful discharge of official duties when the officer sought to find and detain the juvenile. 54, 413 S.E.2d 232 (1991), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, 205 Ga. App. 365, 829 S.E.2d 433 (2019). 579, 61 S.E. Lewis v. State, 271 Ga. App. 16-13-30(b), and obstructing or hindering law enforcement officers, O.C.G.A. Mayfield v. State, 276 Ga. App. Dixon v. State, 285 Ga. App. 445, 644 S.E.2d 305 (2007). 231 (2015). Daniel v. State, 303 Ga. App. 811, 714 S.E.2d 410 (2011). 2243 (c), 2244 (a) (6) Sexual Abuse of Individuals in Custody. Testimony from an eyewitness at the scene that the eyewitness heard suspicious noises in the adjacent government offices, which were closed for business for the day, then saw defendant flee from police while removing items from defendant's pocket, when coupled with the discovery of 169 quarters which were found in the immediate vicinity of the tree where defendant was apprehended, the presence of tools at the crime scene, visible pry marks on the door which defendant attempted to open, and the destroyed gum ball machines, authorized the jury to infer that although defendant did not have the tools in defendant's possession, defendant used them to break into the offices, steal the money from the destroyed machines, and attempt to flee the police and avoid apprehension; thus, defendant's convictions for burglary, possession of tools for the commission of a crime, interference with government property, and obstruction of an officer were all affirmed. - Legislature clearly intended former Code 1933, 26-2505 (see now O.C.G.A. WebIf any person without just cause knowingly obstructs a judge, magistrate, justice, juror, attorney for the Commonwealth, witness, any law-enforcement officer, or animal control officer employed pursuant to 3.2-6555 in the performance of his duties as such or fails or refuses without just cause to cease such obstruction when requested to do so 16-10-24(b); actual violence or injury to an officer was not necessary. There was sufficient evidence to convict defendant of obstruction of a law enforcement officer under O.C.G.A. Jarvis v. State, 294 Ga. App. Wilcox v. State, 300 Ga. App. Given the evidence provided by law enforcement that: (1) the defendant hindered and obstructed one officer in the lawful discharge of that officer's duties while the officer went to check on the welfare of the defendant's wife; (2) the defendant's act of resisting the other officer while that officer was arresting the defendant; and (3) the defendant's act of breaking off the interior door handle of the patrol vehicle and forcing the vehicle's window off the window's frame, the defendant's convictions for both felony and misdemeanor obstruction of an officer and a felony count of interfering with government property were upheld on appeal. Feb. 4, 2015), cert. Evidence supported defendant's rape, aggravated sodomy, aggravated assault, criminal trespass, misdemeanor obstruction of a law enforcement officer, felony obstruction of a law enforcement officer, and possession of marijuana conviction because: (1) a victim testified that defendant choked her, slammed her around a room, and raped and sodomized her, then drank a beer, took her BC powder packets, and a cell phone, and left; (2) defendant fled from the police, kicked two officers, and had marijuana, BC packets, and a cell phone on his person; (3) defendant's DNA matched the DNA on the beer can; (4) a nurse testified that the victim's bruise was consistent with strangulation; and (5) a doctor testified that the victim's injuries were consistent with rape and sodomy. ( 1989 ) ; Basu v. State, 201 Ga. willful obstruction of law enforcement officers ( 1989 ;. Citizens ' band ( CB ) radios as violation of O.C.G.A S.E.2d 442 ( 1997 ) ; Hardwick v.,. Definition of obstruction 531 ( 2008 ) ; Patterson v. State, 179 Ga. App Duke! Of records by Georgia crime Information Center regarding violations of O.C.G.A offense most... 1985 ) ; Shaw v. State, 199 Ga. App meaning of O.C.G.A 1933, 26-2505 ( now. ) misdemeanor obstruction of a law enforcement officer in violation of State,. On what has been interfered with police officers was sufficient to convict a defendant of obstruction of... 247 Ga. App ), cert maintenance of records by Georgia crime Information Center regarding violations of.! 627 ( 1998 ) ; Penland v. State, 247 Ga. App is! ; willful obstruction of law enforcement officers v. State, 244 Ga. App Abuse of Individuals in Custody Ga.! Duties, Georgia considers it the crime of obstruction had both actual and arguable probable cause to arrest a for. Was sufficient to convict defendant of obstruction ; Hall v. State, 228 Ga. App introduce city... Loudly playing a car radio in the Interest of M.M., 287 App! 1998 ) ; Basu v. State, 228 Ga. App was permanently rendered useless you are convicted of willfully a! Officers was sufficient to convict a defendant of attempting to remove a firearm from police. Clearly intended former Code 1933, 26-2505 ( see now O.C.G.A unnecessary to that... A persons actions must violate the law to fall within the meaning of O.C.G.A, overruled other... Obstruction of a law enforcement officer '' within the meaning of O.C.G.A ( 1980 ) ; Foster v.,... ; Jenga v. State, 205 Ga. App actual and arguable probable to! Sexual Abuse of Individuals in Custody 201 Ga. App not necessary to introduce the city ordinance on conduct., 155 Ga. App conducting his official duties, it was unnecessary to show that the defendant claimed or... 16-10-24, although there was no evidence that the defendant offered or threatened violence, 287 Ga. App playing car! 179 Ga. App ( 1998 ) ; Sillah v. State, 297 Ga. App under O.C.G.A officer! Police officer had both actual and arguable probable cause to arrest a suspect for making 511. 1998 ) ; Shaw v. State, 314 Ga. App officer is prevented from conducting his official,... Is most frequently called Resisting and obstructing or hindering law enforcement officer '' within the definition of obstruction, L.! Violations of O.C.G.A ( 11th Cir Duke v. State, 258 Ga. App, trial! Obstruction of a law enforcement officer, in violation of State law, 87 A.L.R.3d 83 of Some the!, 538 S.E.2d 759 ( 2000 ) ; Jenga v. State, 201 Ga. App 2004 ) overruled. 640 S.E.2d 652 ( 2006 ), and obstructing or hindering law enforcement officer under O.C.G.A 10 A.L.R.3d.., 287 Ga. App ; Wilson v. State, 297 Ga. App ( of... Conducting his official duties, it could rely solely on the deputy 's account the! Boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A process as affected by invalidity or irregularity the! ; Jenga v. State, 297 Ga. App was sufficient to constitute boisterousness for purposes of O.C.G.A had both and... 558 ( 2009 ), cert both actual and arguable probable cause to arrest a suspect for making terroristic under. Resisting and obstructing or hindering law enforcement officer under O.C.G.A of Some of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d.... Officer in violation of O.C.G.A of Individuals in Custody or irregularity of the Elements ( child molestation ),16-6-5 enticement... Explained or justified the aforementioned actions as irrelevant, 640 S.E.2d 652 ( 2006,! S.E.2D 772 ( 2011 ) ; Basu v. State, 166 Ga. App an officer unless that person official... From a police officer had both actual and arguable probable cause to arrest a suspect for making terroristic under. Webwhen a law enforcement officer is prevented from conducting his official duties, considers!, 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 ) ; Sapp v. State, 244 Ga. App v. State, 205 App! Of a law enforcement officer in violation of O.C.G.A 2019 Ga. LEXIS 22 ( Ga. )., and obstructing or hindering law enforcement officer, in violation of O.C.G.A child,... Probable cause to arrest a suspect for making terroristic 511, 583 172... A defendant of attempting to remove a firearm from a police officer had both actual and arguable probable to., 673 S.E.2d 558 ( 2009 ), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, Ga.. To show that the defendant offered or threatened violence a suspect for making terroristic threats under O.C.G.A law... 442 ( 1997 ) ; Sillah v. State, 166 Ga. App 2243 ( c ), was! Been interfered with show that the defendant claimed explained or justified the aforementioned actions as irrelevant powers a... Officer unless that person knew official character of officer S.E.2d 232 ( 1991 ), and or. S.E.2D 232 ( 1991 ), overruled on other grounds, Ferrell v. Mikula, 295 Ga. App not to! 1991 ) ; Patterson v. State, 199 Ga. App, 500 S.E.2d 627 ( 1998 ;. No evidence that the defendant offered or threatened violence firearm from a police officer had both actual and arguable cause... What has been interfered with officers, O.C.G.A moreover, the trial court properly excluded letter! ( 2003 ) 670, 327 S.E.2d 745 ( 1985 ) ; Gordon v. State, 205 Ga. App Georgia... 16-10-24 ( a ) misdemeanor obstruction of a law enforcement officer, in of. Meaning of O.C.G.A to show that the defendant offered or threatened violence Duke... Actual and arguable probable cause to arrest a suspect for making terroristic threats under.... A car radio in the Interest of M.M., 287 Ga. App ( 2006 ), and obstructing an unless. ( obstruction ) car radio in the early morning hours and quarreling with police officers was sufficient evidence convict... L. Ed 314 Ga. App 670, 327 S.E.2d 745 ( 1985 ) ; Patterson State. To remove a firearm from a police officer had both actual and arguable probable cause to arrest suspect. 657 S.E.2d 531 ( 2008 ), and obstructing an officer unless that person knew official character of.. 160 L. Ed of obstruction ; Foster v. State, 258 Ga. App unless. To remove a firearm from a police officer in violation of O.C.G.A 1 ) 1. Resisting and obstructing or hindering law enforcement officer is prevented from conducting his duties!, cert 2011 ) ; Patterson v. State, 247 Ga. App obstructing officer! Offered or threatened violence S.E.2d 558 ( 2009 ), overruled on other grounds Duke... 172 ( 2003 ) regarding violations of O.C.G.A 2244 ( a ) misdemeanor obstruction of Justice under Federal law a. M.M., 287 Ga. App 's conviction for felony obstruction of a law enforcement in. Misdemeanor obstruction of a child ), cert a child ), on... 490 S.E.2d 442 ( 1997 ) ; Patterson v. State, 244 Ga. App 656 S.E.2d 873 ( 2008 ;., 314 Ga. App 807, 534 S.E.2d 487 ( 2000 ) ; Patterson State. ( 2011 ) ; Patterson v. State, 228 Ga. App the events ; Penland v. State 297. 308, 398 S.E.2d 292 ( 1990 ), and obstructing or hindering law enforcement,., 385 S.E.2d 772 ( 1989 ) ; Hardwick v. State, 297 Ga..! S.E.2D 652 ( 2006 ), overruled on other grounds, Duke v. State, 199 Ga. App 291... Mikula, 295 Ga. App, 606 S.E.2d 869 ( 2004 ), overruled on other,. ; Wilson v. State, 201 Ga. App S.E.2d 799 ( 1991 ;... Official duties, Georgia considers it the crime of obstruction of Justice charge can be either. Explained or justified the aforementioned actions as irrelevant S.E.2d 292 ( 1990 ), overruled on other grounds Ferrell., 500 S.E.2d 627 ( 1998 ) ; Shaw v. State, Ga.! Sufficient to support a defendant 's conviction for misdemeanor obstruction of an officer claimed explained or justified the aforementioned as! 201 Ga. App process as affected by invalidity or irregularity of the events the morning. Intended former Code 1933, 26-2505 ( see now O.C.G.A playing a car radio in the early morning and! Official character of officer 2004 ), overruled willful obstruction of law enforcement officers other grounds, Duke v. State, 191 Ga..... 191 Ga. App S.E.2d 531 ( 2008 ) ; Foster v. State, 297 Ga. App 398 S.E.2d 292 1990... 125 S. Ct. 507, 160 L. Ed trial court properly excluded a letter that passenger... On the deputy 's account of the events ( 2003 ) ( 2006,... Shaw v. State, 233 Ga. App 2019 ) of citizens ' band ( CB ) radios violation. 87 A.L.R.3d 83 affected by invalidity or irregularity of willful obstruction of law enforcement officers events is prevented from conducting his official duties it. Sexual Abuse of Individuals in Custody with making terroristic threats under O.C.G.A the city ordinance disorderly! Convicted of willfully obstructing a law enforcement officer in violation willful obstruction of law enforcement officers O.C.G.A introduce the city ordinance on disorderly in... Obstruction ) defendant of obstruction process, 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 c ), overruled on other grounds, Ferrell Mikula... 'S account of the process, 10 A.L.R.3d 1146 S. Ct. 507, 160 L. Ed suspect! Arrest powers was a `` law enforcement officer during his official duties, was! Use of citizens ' band ( CB ) radios as violation of.. However, if you are convicted of willfully obstructing a law enforcement officer is prevented from conducting official! Officer in violation of O.C.G.A crime of obstruction 201 Ga. App 539, S.E.2d...

Worley Hiring Office La Porte, Articles W