When the police beat someone up, they need a reason. The reason is almost always the same: “he resisted.” In my four decades of suing police officers, I have seen that story attached to nearly every excessive force case that crosses my desk. The charge they reach for is either Penal Code 148(a)(1) or Penal Code 69. I call them “Resistance Offenses,” and they are the system’s favorite hammer.
Quick Answer
Penal Code 148(a)(1) is a misdemeanor for willfully resisting, delaying, or obstructing an officer, punishable by up to one year in county jail. Penal Code 69 is a “wobbler” for using threats or violence to deter an officer, or knowingly resisting with force or violence; it can be charged as a felony. Either conviction can block a later civil rights lawsuit.
What is the difference between PC 69 and PC 148(a)(1)?
Penal Code 148(a)(1) covers anyone who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs an officer doing his job. Penal Code 69 is more serious: it requires a threat or violence used to deter an officer, or knowingly resisting the officer with force or violence. Section 148 is always a misdemeanor; section 69 can be a felony.
| Penal Code 148(a)(1) | Penal Code 69 | |
| Common name | Resisting, delaying, or obstructing an officer | Resisting an executive officer |
| What it covers | Willfully resisting, delaying, or obstructing an officer in the performance of duty | Using threats or violence to deter an officer, or knowingly resisting with force or violence |
| Level | Misdemeanor | Wobbler (felony or misdemeanor) |
| Maximum jail | Up to 1 year in county jail | Up to 1 year in county jail as a misdemeanor; felony sentencing under Penal Code 1170(h) |
| Maximum fine | $1,000 | $10,000 |
| Force required? | No | Yes, threat or violence (or force when resisting) |
You can read the statutes yourself in Penal Code 148 and Penal Code 69.
Why would prosecutors charge PC 69 instead of 148?
Leverage. A felony-eligible PC 69 charge frightens people into pleading guilty to the misdemeanor PC 148(a)(1). The California Supreme Court held in People v. Smith (2013) that 148(a)(1) can be a lesser included offense of the force-or-violence version of section 69, which makes that trade easy for a prosecutor to offer.
Here is how it plays out. An officer uses force he should not have used. He writes a report saying you “pulled away,” “tensed up,” or “took a fighting stance.” The district attorney files PC 69, and you face the possibility of a felony record. Then the offer comes: plead to a misdemeanor 148, maybe no jail, and go home.
Most people take it. They are scared, they have jobs and kids, and they want it over. I understand that. But that plea often does something nobody explained to them. It can quietly destroy the civil case against the officer who hurt them.
How does a resisting arrest conviction affect a civil rights lawsuit?
Under Heck v. Humphrey (1994), you cannot bring a civil rights claim that would necessarily imply your criminal conviction is invalid. If you pleaded guilty to resisting a lawful arrest, a claim that the arrest itself was unlawful usually fails. The California Supreme Court applied the same rule to state-law claims in Yount v. City of Sacramento (2008).
That is why I say these charges are filed to protect the police, not the public. A conviction for a “Resistance Offense” does two jobs for the department at once: it justifies the force on paper, and it can bar you from suing over it. I wrote about this trap in detail in Can You Plead Out and Still Sue the Police?
There is an important limit. The Ninth Circuit held in Hooper v. County of San Diego (2011) that a 148(a)(1) conviction does not automatically bar an excessive force claim. If you resisted at one moment and the officer then used excessive force at another, both things can be true, and the civil claim may survive. Whether it survives depends heavily on exactly what you pleaded to and the factual basis stated in court.
Can you be convicted if you only argued with the officer?
Not under these statutes alone. Words, questions, and even angry criticism of an officer are generally protected by the First Amendment. Section 148 requires willful resistance, delay, or obstruction of an officer performing a lawful duty, and section 69 requires threats, violence, or force. Talking back is not a crime.
What the officer calls “resistance” is often what I call “Contempt of Cop.” You asked why you were being stopped. You did not move fast enough. You pulled your arm away when it was twisted in a way that hurt. You “Failed the Attitude Test.” None of that is a crime, but every bit of it shows up in a police report as obstruction.
The other element prosecutors often cannot prove is that the officer was lawfully performing his duties. An officer who detains you without reasonable suspicion, or arrests you without probable cause, is not acting lawfully. You cannot be convicted of resisting an unlawful arrest under 148(a)(1). That is one of the first things I look at in every case.
What should you do if you are charged with PC 69 or 148?
- Do not accept a plea before talking to a lawyer who also handles civil rights cases. Your criminal defense strategy and your civil case are connected.
- Get your injuries documented by a doctor and photographed right away.
- Request the body camera and dash camera video through your defense attorney.
- Write down every witness and every camera that might have recorded the encounter.
- Do not discuss the incident on social media or with anyone except your lawyer.
The young lawyer knows the law, but the old lawyer knows the judge. With these cases, knowing how the system tends to treat “resistance” claims, and where the soft spots are in the officer’s story, matters as much as knowing the statutes. Make the wrong step and you are out. We know where to step.
Get help from a lawyer who handles both sides
Steering Law has defended bogus resisting arrest and contempt of cop cases for decades, and we sue the officers who file them. For background, see my articles on Penal Code 69, “The Hammer of Oppression” and Penal Code 148(a)(1). If you are facing a charge in Orange County, our Newport Beach criminal defense team can help. Call (949) 474-1849 before you accept any plea.
Frequently Asked Questions
It can be. PC 69 is a “wobbler,” meaning the prosecutor can file it as a felony or a misdemeanor.
No. Resisting, delaying, or obstructing an officer under 148(a)(1) is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000.
Often, yes. Prosecutors frequently offer a plea to 148(a)(1) in exchange for dropping PC 69, but that plea can have serious consequences for a civil lawsuit.
Sometimes. A conviction can bar claims that would undermine it, but an excessive force claim based on force used at a different moment may still proceed.
It depends on the facts, including whether the officer was acting lawfully and whether the movement was a reflex to pain. These details are often disputed.
A lawful performance of duty is an element of both offenses. If the detention or arrest was unlawful, that is a major defense.
Generally no. Speech alone, including criticism of an officer, is usually protected by the First Amendment and is not resisting under 148(a)(1).
About the Author
Jerry L. Steering, Esq. has been suing police officers and defending bogus “resistance offense” criminal cases throughout California since 1984. A graduate of the University of Georgia School of Law (1984), he is admitted to practice in California, Georgia, the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits, and the United States Supreme Court. His police-misconduct cases have produced settlements and verdicts in the millions, and his work has been featured on ABC News, CNN, Good Morning America, Dateline NBC, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times. He practices from Newport Beach and serves clients across Southern California.
Legal Disclaimer
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this post or contacting Steering Law through this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different; if you are facing a legal issue, you should consult a qualified California attorney about your specific situation. Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Sources
- California Penal Code section 69 (Justia, 2025 code): https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-pen/part-1/title-5/section-69/
- California Penal Code section 148 (Justia, 2025 code): https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-pen/part-1/title-7/chapter-7/section-148/
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (Justia): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/512/477/
- Yount v. City of Sacramento, 43 Cal.4th 885 (2008) (CourtListener): https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=%22Yount+v.+City+of+Sacramento%22
- Hooper v. County of San Diego, 629 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2011) (CourtListener): https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=Hooper+v.+County+of+San+Diego+629+F.3d+1127
- People v. Smith, 57 Cal.4th 232 (2013) (CourtListener): https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=%22People+v.+Smith%22+57+Cal.4th+232
Steering Law is a California-based civil rights and criminal defense firm led by Jerry L. Steering, Esq. The firm focuses on police misconduct cases, including excessive force, false arrest, malicious prosecution, contempt of cop incidents, and 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil rights actions, while also handling serious criminal defense matters. Steering Law is dedicated to protecting clients’ constitutional rights and delivering justice for individuals who have been wronged by law enforcement.
