If you can provide evidence indicating that your actions were in self-defense, it is appropriate for you to resist an arrest. To substantiate this defensive stance, it is incumbent upon you to demonstrate that you held a reasonable belief in the officer’s employment of unwarranted force and that your subsequent actions were imperative to prevent potential fatality or severe harm to oneself.
In addition, it is important to demonstrate that you utilized the minimal amount of force indispensable to safeguard oneself from the potential harm of death or grave physical harm.
This criterion represents an impartial benchmark whereby the jury shall ascertain whether a rational individual, placed in your specific situation, would have reasonably concluded that self-defense was necessary and justified.
If an individual’s reaction to a situation aligns with what a reasonable person would have done, it is impossible to be found guilty of resisting arrest.
An officer can only use force within specific rules and guidelines. These rules are mainly derived from the United States Constitution, federal and state laws, and policies and orders of the police department.
A police officer’s decision to use force is always determined by the behavior of the person involved, meaning that the officer will respond accordingly. If a civilian resists or poses a threat, an officer is permitted to use more force accordingly.
If you have been arrested for resisting arrest in the Los Angeles area and don’t know where to turn, contact the experienced Los Angeles criminal defense lawyers today at Esfandi Law Group Criminal Defense Attorneys today.
Resisting Arrest Covers Many Different Actions
To resist arrest, you must disobey what the officer asks, like not following their instructions to put your arms behind your back or refusing to get out of your car when told to do so.
This is called “passive resistance.” This allows the officer to apply the required amount of force to apprehend the individual. This might mean using his hands to make the subject put their arms behind their back for handcuffing, or to take the subject out of the car.
Suppose a person fights against being arrested, like stopping an officer from putting their hands behind their back, stiffening their body, or walking/running away. In that case, they are called an “active resister.”
When the resistance grows, the officer can use more force, but they only use as much force as needed to arrest the person. Depending on the situation, the officer can use non-deadly force, such as techniques to cause pain, hitting with a baton or asp, and hitting with an open hand.
Only Reasonable Force Should Be Used
The use of force should only be reasonable and necessary to ensure the capture of the individual, depending on the particular circumstances of the situation. If a person is moving their arms to stop themselves from being handcuffed, an officer is not allowed to punch them.
Clearly, an officer cannot use lethal force to apprehend someone. The main reason why an officer can use deadly force is if they have a good reason to believe that a person is about to seriously hurt or kill the officer or others nearby.
A jury would decide if a normal officer would had thought the same way in those conditions. ‘If they think the officer’s belief was unfair, he has used unfair force.’
In simpler terms, police should only use force when necessary and justified. Using excessive force that is not reasonably needed to make someone obey breaches the individual’s constitutional rights. And that’s the case, no matter if the person was fighting back or not.
If someone refuses to be arrested or cooperate, the officer is still legally obligated to carry out their duties. He needs to obey the Constitution, relevant laws or police department rules when it comes to using force.
The issue with simple and catchy headlines such as “If you want to avoid being shot by the police, just comply with arrest” is that they can blur the distinction between practical advice and the legal responsibilities of law enforcement. Police officers are allowed to use different levels of force depending on the situation. We have often observed that when a civilian resists moderately, the officer responds with excessive and unreasonable force.
In California, according to Penal Code 148(a), you can be accused of resisting arrest even if you didn’t resist, delay, or obstruct the officer while they were doing their job. Even if you are rude or uncooperative during an arrest or investigation, it is not enough to prove you are guilty of the offense.
However, the police officer arresting you may exaggerate what happened to punish your disrespectful behavior towards the law. Hiring a skilled lawyer specializing in criminal defense helps you avoid unnecessary accusations by investigating to prove you’re not guilty.
Get in Contact With a Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer Today
If you’ve been charged with resisting arrest, even if you believe the officer used excessive force—you don’t have to face the consequences alone. Time is critical in these cases, and having an experienced criminal defense attorney on your side can make all the difference.
Seppi Esfandi is an expert attorney who has over 22 years of practice defending a variety of cases. He understands the complexities of cases involving excessive force.
Need an Attorney? CALL NOW: 310-274-6529
Frequently Asked Questions about Resisting Arrest & Excessive Force in California
1. Do I have the right to resist arrest if I’m innocent?
No—simply being innocent does not give you a free right to resist arrest under California law. Under California Penal Code Section 148(a)(1), it’s a crime to willfully resist, obstruct or delay a peace officer in the discharge of their duties.
However, there are important exceptions: if the arresting officer is using clearly excessive force or performing an unlawful arrest (i.e., without probable cause), you may have a legal defense. But the safer legal strategy is to comply at the moment and contest the legality of the arrest or force afterward—not to physically resist in the moment.
2. What qualifies as “excessive force” by police in California?
Though definitions vary, excessive force occurs when a peace officer uses more force than is reasonably necessary under the circumstances to make an arrest or detain someone. When that happens, the officer may no longer be considered “lawfully performing” their duty.
When the officer is acting outside of legal bounds due to excessive force, then some of the protections against resisting arrest may shift—but those situations require very careful analysis.
3. Can I resist arrest if I believe the force being used is excessive?
It’s a complex area. Some legal authorities say that resistance may be justified when an officer uses clearly unreasonable or excessive force, because at that point the officer’s actions may be unlawful, and you may have a right to act in self-defense.
That said, resisting in that situation still carries significant risk—charges of resisting arrest (or worse) can still be filed, and you’ll need to prove that the force used was excessive, and your response was reasonable. Many attorneys advise that your best option is to comply and raise the issue later in court or in a civil rights claim.
4. What if the arresting party is not local police, but a federal agency like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and they use excessive force—does the same apply?
Yes, generally the same principles apply: an arresting agent—whether from local or federal law enforcement—must act within their lawful duties and cannot use unreasonable or excessive force. If ICE is making the arrest and uses excessive force, then your defenses around resisting arrest may be impacted similarly to a local‐law enforcement case.
However, dealing with federal agencies often involves additional layers of complexity (immigration law consequences, federal civil rights claims, etc.). If the arrest involves ICE and force is excessive, you’ll want to consult an attorney with experience both in criminal defense and immigration/federal‐agency issues.
5. What are the penalties for a resisting arrest charge in California?
Under Penal Code § 148(a)(1), resisting arrest is typically a misdemeanor, with punishments that can include up to one year in county jail, fines, and other conditions.
If during an incident, excessive force by the officer is proven, and you can show that the arrest was unlawful or the officer acted outside their duties, you may have a strong defense—potentially leading to reduction or dismissal of the charge.
