California Penal Code § 69 PC prohibits resisting an executive officer by using force or intimidation to try to prevent executive officers from carrying out their job duties. A conviction is punishable by probation, fines, and up to three years in jail.
Resisting an executive officer is closely related to resisting arrest (Penal Code 148 PC). However, 69 PC is a more serious offense because it involves the use of threats of violence. The section also applies to a broader set of executive duties than just making an arrest.
The issue of resisting the police has gained a great deal of attention after the George Floyd killing and subsequent protests over racial injustice and police abuse.
The full language of the code section states that:
69. (a) Every person who attempts, by means of any threat or violence, to deter or prevent an executive officer from performing any duty imposed upon the officer by law, or who knowingly resists, by the use of force or violence, the officer, in the performance of his or her duty, is punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
(b) The fact that a person takes a photograph or makes an audio or video recording of an executive officer, while the officer is in a public place or the person taking the photograph or making the recording is in a place he or she has the right to be, does not constitute, in and of itself, a violation of subdivision (a).
Examples
- Mark tries to push a police officer, who is attempting to arrest his friend for petty theft.
- Monique blocks the door to a city council member’s office so that the official is denied access.
- Paco “cuts the power” to a county courtroom so that a prosecutor cannot prove a criminal case against his brother.
Defenses
There are several legal defenses that you can use to contest a charge brought under this statute. These include showing that:
- the officer’s conduct was unlawful,
- you were acting in self-defense, and/or
- the “victim” was not an executive officer.
Penalties
A violation of this code section is a wobbler offense, meaning that it can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony.
If charged as a misdemeanor, the offense is punishable by:
- up to one year in county jail, or
- misdemeanor (or summary) probation.
If charged as a felony, the offense is punishable by:
- up to three years in county jail, or
- felony (or formal) probation.
Resisting an executive officer is not generally not a strike under California’s three-strikes law. Though it can be treated as a strike if the officer suffers great bodily injury or if a firearm or deadly weapon is used.1
Additional Consequences
Note that if you are convicted of this crime, this conviction may lead to:
- immigration consequences, and
- loss of your gun rights.
Also, note that you can have a conviction expunged once you successfully complete:
- probation, or
- any jail time.
Our California criminal defense attorneys will explain the following in this article:
- 1. What is “resisting an executive officer”?
- 2. Defenses
- 3. Penalties
- 4. Immigration Consequences
- 5. Expungements
- 6. Gun Rights
- 7. Civil Remedies for False Arrest
- 8. Related Offenses
1. What is “resisting an executive officer”?
Penal Code 69 PC is the California statute that makes it a crime to either:
- try to prevent an executive officer from performing their duties, or
- resist an executive officer in the performance of their duties.
To convict you of resisting an executive officer under a prevention offense, California prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt two elements of the jury instructions:
- you willfully and unlawfully used violence, or a threat of violence, to try to prevent an officer from performing a lawful duty, and
- when you acted, you did so intentionally.2
Meanwhile, to convict you of resisting an executive officer under a resistance offense, California prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt three elements of the jury instructions:
- you unlawfully used force or violence to resist an executive officer,
- when you acted, the officer was performing a lawful duty, and
- when you acted, you knew the officer was performing a duty.3
Who is Considered an Executive Officer?
An executive officer is a government official who may use their own discretion in performing his duties.4 Examples include:
- police officers and sheriffs,
- judges,
- government prosecutors and defense attorneys, and
- other elected officials.
Note that questions often arise under this code section on the meaning of:
- willfully,
- threat of violence,
- violence, and
Willfully
For purposes of this code section, you commit an act willfully when you do it willingly or on purpose.5
Threat of Violence
Under this statute, a threat may be oral or written and may be implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of statements and conduct.6
Note that you do not have to communicate the threat directly to the intended victim, but you may do so through someone else.7
Note also that it is not necessary, for a guilty conviction, that you have the actual ability to carry out the threat.8
Violence
“Force” and “violence,” under this code section mean any unlawful application of physical force against another person.
It is not necessary that the application causes harm or pain – the slightest touch is enough if done in a rude, angry, or offensive manner.9
2. Defenses
Here at Shouse Law Group, we have represented literally thousands of people accused of obstructing authority, including resisting an executive officer. In our experience, the following three defenses have proven very effective with judges, juries, and prosecutors at getting these charges reduced or dismissed.
The Officer’s Conduct Was Unlawful
An officer must be performing some lawful duty in order for you to be found guilty under 69 PC.10 This means a solid defense is for you to show that, while you may have interfered with an officer, that officer was acting unlawfully.
For example, a peace officer is not lawfully performing their duties if they are:
- unlawfully arresting or detaining you, or
- using unreasonable or excessive force in their duties.11
Note that if we believe you have been a victim of police misconduct, we would file a Pitchess motion. This is a request for information contained in the law enforcement officer’s personnel file.
If it turns out that other people have accused the officer of misconduct, this could be used to impeach their credibility. This could lead to the charge being reduced or dismissed during the pretrial process.
You Acted in Self-defense
If you resisted an executive officer who was using excessive force against you, you are entitled to exercise your right to defend yourself in accordance with California’s self-defense laws. These laws will protect your conduct as long as the force you used was reasonable under the circumstances.12
Typical evidence we rely on in these cases include eyewitness accounts, surveillance video, and medical records.
There Was No Executive Officer
Recall that 69 PC only applies to executive officers. Maybe the alleged victim in this case believed they were an executive officer when in fact 69 PC does not apply to them.
In these cases, we would examine the alleged victim’s job title and duties to see if there is a plausible argument that they do not qualify as an executive officer.
A violation of this crime can lead to jail time and/or a fine
3. Penalties
A violation of Penal Code 69 PC is a wobbler offense, meaning that it can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony.
If charged as a misdemeanor, the offense is punishable by:
- misdemeanor (or summary) probation,
- up to one year in county jail, and/or
- a maximum fine of $10,000.13
If charged as a felony, the offense is punishable by:
- felony (or formal) probation,
- up to three years in county jail, and/or
- a fine of up to $10,000.14
4. Immigration Consequences
A conviction of resisting an executive officer may result in negative immigration consequences.
United States immigration law says that some California criminal convictions can lead to a non-citizen being deported. Some convictions can also make an immigrant “inadmissible.”
A category of “deportable” or “inadmissible” crimes includes aggravated felonies.15
This means that:
- if you are convicted of felony resisting an officer, and
- the facts show that the felony is an “aggravated” felony,
then the conviction may have detrimental immigration effects.
5. Expungements
You can seek to get the conviction expunged.
An “expungement” releases you from virtually “all penalties and disabilities” arising out of the conviction.16
As a basic rule, PC 1203.4 authorizes an expungement for a misdemeanor or felony offense provided you:
- successfully completed probation, and
- are not currently charged with a criminal offense, on probation for one, or serving a sentence for a crime.17
This means that once you have successfully completed probation or served out a jail term, then you may begin trying to get the crime expunged.
6. Gun Rights
A conviction for violating 69 PC may have an effect on your gun rights.
According to California law, convicted felons are prohibited from acquiring or possessing a gun in California.
This means that:
- if a prosecutor charges a violation of this code section as a felony, and
- you get convicted,
then that conviction would mean you would have to give up any gun ownership and possession rights.
7. Civil Remedies for False Arrest
There are instances when you may get injured because an executive officer is acting unlawfully. In these situations, you may be able to file a civil lawsuit for:
- false arrest, or
- a violation of United States Code Section 1983.
False Arrest
A false arrest is a type of wrongful arrest in which you are detained without your consent and without legal authority. In the event that a false arrest occurs, you can bring a civil lawsuit against the police and try to obtain compensation for any losses incurred.
To succeed in such a civil suit, you must successfully prove the following:
- the police arrested you without a warrant,
- you were harmed, and
- the officer’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing that harm.18
You may be able to obtain both:
- compensatory damages, and
- punitive damages.
Section 1983 Claims
United States Code Section 1983 is a law that allows people whose constitutional rights have been violated by government officials the chance to sue those officials in court.
The constitutional rights protected by Section 1983 include:
- the Fourth Amendment constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure, and
- the Eighth Amendment constitutional right against cruel and unusual punishment.
This means if an executive officer violates either of these rights of a party, that party may try to bring a civil suit to recover any damages the officer caused.
A plaintiff bringing this suit may be able to recover both:
- compensatory damages, and
- punitive damages.
8. Related Offenses
There are three laws related to resisting an executive officer. These are:
- battery on a peace officer – PC 243,
- evading a police officer – VC 2800.1, and
- criminal threats – PC 422.
Battery on a Peace Officer – PC 243
Penal Code 243 PC makes it a crime to:
- unlawfully harm or touch a police officer in an offensive manner, and
- to do so, while the officer is engaged in the performance of his duties.
Note that this offense applies only to police officers, while 69 PC applies to the broader topic of executive officers.
Evading a Police Officer – VC 2800.1
Vehicle Code 2800.1 VC makes it a crime to willfully attempt to flee from a police officer who is pursuing you in a car or on a bicycle.
Note that Penal Code 69 is much broader in scale since VC 2800.1 only applies to the limited fact pattern of trying to flee from a cop that is in a car or on a bike.
Criminal Threats – PC 422
Penal Code 422 PC is the California statute that prohibits “criminal threats.”
A “criminal threat” is made when:
- you threaten to kill or physically harm another person, and
- that person is thereby placed in a state of reasonably sustained fear for their safety or for the safety of their immediate family.19
Note that the victim here does not have to be limited to an executive officer or a police officer.
Additional Reading
For more information, read our related articles:
- Police misconduct – how to bring a lawsuit – Bringing civil charges against law enforcement.
- Is it illegal to lie to police? – Whether giving false information is a crime.
- What does “resisting, delaying or obstructing an officer” mean? – What qualifies as resisting an officer.
- Do I have to identify myself to police in California? – Your legal obligations to police.
Legal References:
- See Penal Code 1192.7 and 667.5(c).
- Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2024 edition) CALCRIM No. 2651. Trying to Prevent an Executive Officer From Performing Duty. (Pen. Code, § 69)
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:
1. The defendant willfully and unlawfully used (violence/ [or] a threat of violence) to try to (prevent/ [or] deter) an executive officer from performing the officer’s lawful duty;
2. When the defendant acted, (he/she) intended to (prevent/ [or] deter) the executive officer from performing the officer’s lawful duty;
[3. A reasonable listener in a similar situation with similar knowledge would interpret the threat, in light of the context and surrounding circumstances, as a serious expression of intent to commit an act of unlawful force or violence;]
AND
(3/4). When the defendant acted, (he/she) knew that the person was an executive officer.As to the second element, see also People v. Gutierrez (2002) 28 Cal. 4th 1083. - Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2024 edition) CALCRIM No. 2652. Resisting an Executive Officer in Performance of Duty. (Pen. Code, § 69)
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:
1. The defendant [unlawfully] used force [or violence] to resist an executive officer;
2. When the defendant acted, the officer was performing (his/her) lawful duty;
3. When the defendant acted, the defendant knew that the person (he/she) resisted was an executive officer;
AND
4. When the defendant acted, (he/she) knew the executive officer was performing (his/her) duty - See same.
- CALCRIM No. 2651.
- See same.
- See same.
- People v. Hines (1997) 15 Cal.4th 997.
- California Jury Instructions, Criminal CALJIC 16.141 — Force and violence, defined.
- In re Manuel G (1997) 16 Cal.4th 805.
- CALCRIM No. 2651.
- Judicial Council Of California Criminal Jury Instruction 3470 – Right to Self-Defense or Defense of Another (Non-Homicide).
- California Penal Code 69 PC.
- See same. See also California Penal Code 1170h PC.
- See INA 237 (a) (2) (A).
- California Penal Code 1203.4 PC.
- See same.
- CACI No. 1401. False Arrest Without Warrant by Peace Officer.
- California Penal Code 422 PC.