Assaulting a Protected Person

Most people are aware it is illegal to assault another person. There is an important distinction to make between traditional assault and assaulting a protected person. Certain individuals in the state of California are considered "protected people" due to their occupational role or relationship to an individual with governmental affiliation. California officials have established section 217.7 of the state's Penal Code to explain exactly what assaulting a protected person means. Let's take a closer look at this law, define assaulting a protected person and explain how an attorney can help clear your name.

California Penal Code Section 217.7

Section of California's Penal Code, states assaulting a protected person carries harsher penalties than regular assault of a non-protected person. Assaulting a protected individual is a felony while simple assault is deemed a misdemeanor. Conviction for the felonious assault of an individual considered to be a protected person is quite severe compared to a conviction for misdemeanor assault.

California Penal Code Section 217.7

The Elements of Proof Necessary to Prove Someone is Guilty of Assaulting a Protected Person

Opposing counsel must prove several nuanced elements beyond a reasonable doubt to prove assault of a protected person has occurred. The individual accused of this crime must have committed simple assault. The assaulted individual must qualify as a protected person or must be related to an individual considered a protected person. Furthermore, the reason for the assault must be considered retaliation for performance of official duties or to prevent the protected individual from completing his or her work-related duties.

The Definition of Assault

Assault is the illegal attempt combined with the present ability to inflict a violent injury on another individual as detailed in section 240 of California's Penal Code. An individual must illegally try to apply physical force and have the ability to apply that physical force at the current moment. As an example, consider a situation in which Joe Schmoe attempts to kick, punch or otherwise physically harm an individual far beyond his reach. Joe does not realistically have the ability to apply physical force from that distance.

Furthermore, the individual who attempts to apply physical force must have the prior intent to induce a violent injury to another person. Therefore, any sort of medical condition or physical disability that has the potential to cause your limbs or other parts of your body to move in an individual's direction is a justifiable excuse for alleged assault. Such disabilities and conditions mean the accused individual does not have the intent to inflict a violent injury on another individual. However, assault does not mandate the aggressor intentional cause the injury or even be aware of the possibility the other person might be injured by the action.

The Elements of Proof Required to Prove Assault

An individual cannot be found guilty of regular assault unless specific elements are shown to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. The individual in question must have intentionally and illegally committed an act that by its nature results in the infliction of physical force on another person. The individual committing this act must be fully aware of the facts that would lead a reasonable individual to understand that physical force would be inflicted on another individual as a natural, probable and direct result of the action in question. Furthermore, the individual performing the crime must have the ability to apply physical force to the supposed victim.

Do not attempt to navigate this legal maze on your own. Our criminal defense attorneys will develop a defense strategy custom tailored to the nuances of your unique case. If opposing counsel cannot prove the necessary elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you will not face conviction for assault. Even a minor mistake made by the prosecuting attorney, police or the alleged victim creates the opportunity for a successful legal defense strategy that proves your innocence.

An In-depth Look at What Constitutes the Use of Physical Force

The most important element required to prove an individual has committed assault is the willful intent to execute a wrongful act with the use of physical force against another individual. It is important to distinguish exactly what the use of physical force against someone else truly means in the context of California's assault laws. This term indicates physical contact is applied in an offensive or harmful way. If the prosecution cannot prove you had the ability at the time of the supposed assault to actually make physical contact, we will fiercely advocate on your behalf to have the charge dropped. However, even slight physical contact can be considered assault if it is not deemed offensive or harmful.

Assault can also occur in an indirect manner. Consider an irate individual using a hard or sharp object in his or her hand or throwing such an object. Even if such physical contact does not involve the aggressor physically touching another's body, the objects held in the hand or thrown really do qualify as an extension of the human body. Therefore, the mere attempt to take someone's wallet or something else on their person qualifies as assault. However, in order to be found guilty of assault, you cannot have successfully inflicted force on another individual. What matters most is that you took action that has the potential to cause the application of physical force.

An Example of What Constitutes Assault

Use your mind's eye to envision a cozy coffee shop setting in Mountain View. A woman named Alicia is sitting at a small table, waiting for the bill after finishing her decaf coffee and multigrain bagel with cream cheese. The waiter returns to Alicia's table with the bill and Alicia's credit card on a tray. The waiter states the credit card has insufficient funds to pay the bill. Alicia is short-tempered, bipolar and in the midst of a painful breakup with her significant other. She reacts violently to the bad news by closing her fist and thrusting it at the waiter's tray.

Thankfully, the waiter stepped back to avoid Alicia's wrath. Alicia makes slight contact with the tray but does not succeed in knocking it from his hands. In this example, Alicia is guilty of assault. It does not matter that Alicia did not attempt to physically contact the waiter's person. Nor does it matter that Alicia failed to knock the tray from the waiter's grasp. The mere fact that the waiter held the tray in his hands makes this object a legitimate extension of his body in the context California's assault laws. Alicia is guilty of assault as she intended to apply physical force against the extended portion of the waiter's person.

An Example That Does Not Qualify as Assault

Consider a situation in which a young teen named Thisbe is playing a game of rock, paper, scissors with her best friend, Jordan. Another individual named Tommy slides between Thisbe and Jordan in an attempt to participate in the game. Thisbe is angered by this intrusion and tosses her nachos with melted cheese at Tommy. Thisbe completely misses her target. Tommy is untouched during this unfortunate ordeal. In this situation, it is possible for Thisbe to be found guilty of assault. This is an interesting nuance in California's assault laws as Tommy was never at risk for physical harm.

In the example above, it is highly improbable that the nachos and melted cheese would cause any sort of physical pain to Tommy. However, there is no doubt the impact of the nachos and cheese landing on Tommy would prove offensive. The bottom line is it does not matter if the nachos and cheese physically contacted Tommy as Thisbe's action is considered offensive. All that is necessary to prove assault occurred is harmful or offensive physical contact. Alicia's attempt to contact Tommy with the nachos and cheese is ample evidence to serve as the basis of an assault charge.

Defining Willful Action and Awareness

In order to prove assault occurred, opposing counsel must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant acted in a willful manner. The charged individual must have acted willfully, intending to cause harm. If it can be proven the individual in question should have known that his or her action would cause harm, he or she can be found guilty of assault. However, proving the willful component of an assault charge is easier said than done. Opposing counsel is tasked with proving the defendant acted in a manner that likely or directly causes direct injury to another individual. There is no need for opposing counsel to prove any sort of specific intention to induce pain or any other form of physical harm. Opposing counsel must prove the act has the potential to negatively impact the plaintiff (the allegedly harmed party).

Assault boils down to being a crime of general intent. This means that in order for an individual to have the intent required to prove guilt, he or she is forced to intend the actual act and also have enough information that would persuade an ordinary person to understand the nature of such an act would cause physical force against another individual. Therefore, if the act is intentional, claiming there is no intent of unlawful conduct or the intent to inflict harm on another person will not qualify as a viable defense.

Explaining the Term “Protected Person”

If opposing counsel can prove the individual who was supposedly assaulted has a relationship with the federal, state or local government in the form of employment or as a representative, the charge shifts from simple assault to assault of a protected person. The statute is also applicable to the relatives of individuals who have the governmental relationship. The term “relatives” encompasses the protected person's parents, children and siblings.

As an example, consider a local politician advocating for the legalization of all drugs across the state of California. Mark, an anti-drug activist, believes the politician is misguided. Mark decides the politician in question must be punished for his political stance on drug legalization. Mark confronts the politician at a local summit and throws a glass bottle at him. This action is retaliatory in nature as it is in response to the politician's push for statewide drug legalization. Therefore, Mark can be convicted of assaulting a protected person.

The Intent Necessary to be Found Guilty of Assaulting a Protected Person

The prosecution is tasked with proving the accused person intentionally assaulted the protected person in a retaliatory manner in response to his or her completion of official duties. If the charged party's actions were made to prevent the protected person from completing his or her official duties, it will be that much easier to obtain a guilty verdict. Circumstantial evidence is all that is necessary for such proof. If the assault took place at the protected person's office or at a public gathering, it is evidence enough to infer intent.

Penalties for Assaulting a Protected Person

An individual found guilty of assaulting a protected person will face upward of a full year of incarceration or a fine that does not exceed $1,00013 if charged with a misdemeanor. However, if the prosecution charges the offending party with a felony, the penalties are more severe. The felony version of this crime can lead to imprisonment for as few as three years or as long as 16 years. Felonious assault of a protected person can also carry a $10,000 fine.

How an Attorney can Help

Our attorneys are here to combat your assaulting a protected person charge, minimize your punishment or possibly even get the charges dropped altogether. As noted above, this type of assault is a wobbler, meaning the penalties differ based on whether it is charged as a misdemeanor or felony. If you are found guilty, prospective employers will likely see this black mark on your record when conducting a background check. Meet with our legal team and we will craft a legal strategy suited to your unique case. Examples of successful defenses against this charge include self-protection, the lack of the present ability to inflict the harm and the lack of requisite intent.

Contacting the Best Assaulting a Protected Person Attorney Near Me

If you have been charged with regular assault or assault of a protected person, our legal team is here to help. We will zealously advocate on your behalf to clear your name, ensure justice is served and return your life to at least a semblance of normalcy. Reach out to Orange County Criminal Lawyer today at 714-831-1858 to learn more about how we can help prove your innocence.