Obstruction of justice is a deliberate act committed with the intent of impeding the legislative or judicial process. The purpose of this charge is to ensure that legislative, judicial, and administrative proceedings are protected. If you are convicted of obstructing justice in a federal criminal case, you may face penalties under Section 1505 of the United States Code. Under federal law, the features of this offense are somewhat close to those under California law. Seek legal advice with a Criminal Defense Lawyer as soon as possible.

Find A Criminal Defense Attorney Near Me

You will be charged with obstruction of justice under California Penal Code Section 132 if you intentionally:

Any civil or criminal prosecution should be avoided or avoided.
Any records or materials should not be misrepresented.
Falsely react to written interrogations or oral depositions.
Any records or other materials should be removed, hidden, or destroyed.

Any handwritten material or electronic correspondence, such as text messages and emails, may be considered "documentary material." Attempting to delete this information from your phone's memory or destroying it may be considered an obstruction of justice.

Acts that corruptly obstruct or hinder "the proper administration of justice," or the due process of law, are referred to as obstruction of justice in legal terms. Threats to obstruct, as well as attempts to obstruct, are both included in this category, as are real obstructive behavior.

Overt intimidation of court or government officials by the use of threats is often considered obstruction. It may also involve obstructive attempts, actual interference, or overt behavior against a court official to weaken the appearance of their legal authority.

Obstruction of justice is a federal or state-level offense, depending on the form of proceeding that has been disrupted. In reality, it's often classified as a type of white-collar crime.

The defendant must know of an investigation or criminal prosecution and seek to manipulate it to be guilty of obstructing justice. Furthermore, there must be a clear motive to impede the proceeding, as well as a connection between the obstruction attempt and the proceeding that the defendant was aware of. As a result, merely refusing to help law enforcement does not automatically equate to obstruction of justice. If you have a particularly unique case, you can ask your Criminal Defense Lawyer for more details.

Many offenses may be called obstruction of justice due to the broad meaning, which encompasses any interference with law enforcement. You can even be found guilty of obstruction even though you have no involvement in the crime. For example, even though you did not use the weapon to commit the crime, disposing of it could result in you being charged with obstruction of justice.

Obstruction of justice may also take the form of:

knowingly and knowingly deceiving police officers during interrogation
Falsifying or deleting possibly incriminating records that the police are looking for during an investigation
Attempting to sway a jury or witness, such as by persuading a jury member or witness to decline to testify
tampering with facts with the intent to deceive
Retaliating against a witness, suspect, or source who has been involved in the case
Resisting Arrest

A person's right to remain silent enables them to refuse to answer questions posed by the police. It does not, however, protect a person who lies when answering a question. As previously stated, obstruction does not occur merely when someone refuses to cooperate with an investigation; rather, obstruction happens when someone tries to derail the investigation entirely.

What Does the Prosecutor Have to Prove in a Felony Resisting Arrest Case?

To obtain a conviction for resisting arrest, the prosecution must provide testimony on the following points, referred to as the "elements" of the crime, and the judge or jury must find that the prosecutor has proven each one beyond a reasonable doubt. While the elements of the crime differ by state, all of the following must normally be true:

A law enforcement officer was deliberately obstructed or defied by the defendant. This indicates the defendant acted with the intent to obstruct the arrest. However, the person's decisions did not have to result in the resulting damage that they did.
The defendant behaved violently or attempted to act violently against the law enforcement officer. Striking or pulling the officer, for example, would fulfill this requirement. A defendant's attempt to hit an officer with an item in his or her hand will also meet these criteria.
The officer was lawfully performing his official duties. This indicates that the officer was adequately performing official duties, such as investigating a crime or conducting a traffic stop. And if the charges are dismissed or the suspect is acquitted at trial, a law enforcement officer will be behaving legally if they apprehend the wrong person. (To learn more about your rights if you're convicted, click here.)

What Do "Law Enforcement Officers" Mean?

When it comes to describing "law enforcement agents," state laws differ. The law may include other law enforcement personnel such as prison guards, probation supervisors, parole supervisors, park rangers, or correctional officers in the definition and police officers, sheriffs, and other frequently encountered peace officers.

Private security guards are commonly regarded as private citizens rather than law enforcement agents since they are not doing a public duty. As a result, attempted arrests by security guards are often exempt from resisting arrest rules.

When off-duty police officers serve as private security guards, the outcome could be different. Off-duty police officers serving as private security guards have been found to be subject to resisting arrest laws by some courts, whereas off-duty police officers working as private security guards have been found not to be subject to resisting arrest laws by other courts.

What is the prosecutor's burden of proof in terms of resistance?

State regulations also differ in terms of the types of actions and threats that qualify as felony resisting arrest. Physical aggression is sufficient, but simply refusing to speak is insufficient. Non-threatening expressions of dissatisfaction with the officer's conduct are normally insufficient. Loud, intimidating, and lengthy arguments, on the other hand, may be sufficient.

Penalties

In California, resisting, obstructing, or delaying arrest is a misdemeanor only. If you are convicted, you could face a one-year term in the County Jail. You will be expected to serve half of the time. This is a somewhat similar charge to PC 69, but it is less serious, and the officers/officials are usually not injured.

If any person is harmed as a result of your delaying or impeding, you can be held civilly responsible for your willful act, even if you did not wish to harm someone and simply wanted to postpone the official. Furthermore, if you are charged with a violent crime in the future, your previous record would possibly complicate your current case and subject you to harsher penalties.

Any or more of the following sentences can be imposed on those convicted of felony resisting arrest:

Imprisonment. Depending on the jurisdiction, sentences can include time in county jail or one or more years in state prison. The judge will order that you complete your entire sentence in prison.
Fines are imposed. Fines are imposed by the courts to punish criminals. These fines also contribute to the ongoing costs of the criminal justice system. The sum of the fine varies depending on the circumstances.
Probation entails meeting with a probation officer on a daily basis and adhering to other terms and conditions, such as finding jobs and attending therapy.
Volunteering in the community. The requirement that the offender volunteer for a prescribed number of hours with court-approved groups, such as charities, is often included as part of probation.

What Is Criminal Obstruction and How Does It Happen?

Many different statutes have obstruction clauses incorporated into them by Congress and state legislatures (for example, financial regulations, health and safety laws, and antitrust laws). As a consequence, there isn't a single "judicial obstruction" law to reference. All of these provisions, however, have some common features.

In general, a person commits criminal obstruction when he or she engages in some act that obstructs the investigation or prosecution of a crime. Such involvement, as described by state and federal laws, can range from warning someone about a subpoena for records to shielding a suspect from the authorities.

There are a plethora of ways to obstruct.

Certain forms of intervention can appear to be harmless or even helpful (such as the teller warning her coworker), whereas others clearly cross the legal line (such as destroying evidence). The more severe the obstruction of justice, the harsher the penalty for criminal obstruction.

Providing Assistance to a Suspect

A lover or parent who assists a loved one convicted of a crime in eluding the police is guilty of obstructing justice and may face charges. Even informing a coworker of an ongoing investigation (as in the example above) is likely obstruction because it allows the individual being investigated to destroy evidence, flee, or even plan an alibi.
Obstruction is clearly described as hiding a suspect or assisting in the removal of incriminating evidence. One example of such obstructive behavior has received international attention: A Romanian woman admitted to the media that her sons reportedly stole and burned many paintings by Picasso, Monet, Matisse, and other masters. She said she threw the paintings in the oven to erase evidence of her sons' crimes. (The woman later recanted, but she was charged criminally.) Under US statute, if the mother did indeed burn the paintings, she would have committed criminal obstruction of justice.

Lying

Obstruction of justice is described as lying to authorities when questioned during a criminal investigation. (See 18 USC 1505.) This involves lying in written interrogatories, falsifying records, and other methods of giving investigators false facts.
Giving false information to investigators may also be considered perjury if the information is given under oath in a grand jury hearing or any situation where the individual giving the false information is under oath. For more information on perjury, click here.

Evidence Manipulation

Obstruction of justice may be filed against someone who damages, alters, or otherwise tampers with physical evidence in a criminal investigation. If the teller in the previous case had altered the customer's account to conceal the coworker's wrongdoings, she would have committed obstruction of justice once more. (This obstruction would be more serious than merely informing a coworker of the investigation, which would result in a harsher penalty.)
Obstruction of justice also includes witness tampering. Anyone who assaults, coerces, bribes, or otherwise seeks to prevent a witness from giving a truthful testimony is guilty. (See 18 USC 1510 for more information.)

Falsifying, Destroying, or Concealing Records in a Federal Investigation

If anyone alters or damages a text or any other "tangible item" with the intent of manipulating or obstructing a criminal investigation, they are charged with federal obstruction of justice under 18 USC. Section 1519. Evidence destruction in the course of an investigation will result in a sentence of up to twenty years in prison.

However, the government must prove that an individual falsified or damaged records while under investigation, even though those documents later turned out to be crucial evidence in a case.

The prosecution must show two things beyond a reasonable doubt to convict anyone of falsifying or destroying evidence related to a federal investigation: (1) the documentation or "tangible item" lost or falsified is important to a federal matter; and (2) the defendant falsified, destroyed, or concealed it with the intent to hinder a future or ongoing investigation.

The term "tangible object" has been interpreted by courts to include all types of physical evidence, effectively making tampering with any sort of evidence involved in an investigation illegal.

Courts have also interpreted "federal matter" narrowly to include any area where the federal government can assert its authority, including criminal and civil investigations. This obviously refers to criminal investigations, but it also refers to private organizations that keep knowledge from government agencies hidden. When the FBI searches a criminal suspect's home, the CEO of an energy firm who lies to the EPA about how much the company pollutes is just as guilty of falsifying evidence as a criminal suspect who shreds incriminating records.

However, there are a number of defenses against federal obstruction of justice claims. And if the prosecution can show that someone damaged, falsified, or withheld evidence, defendants can show that they didn't intend to obstruct an investigation.

If someone is charged with shredding records that were later found to be important in an investigation, they may claim that they did so in the ordinary course of business. They may also say that they were not aware of the investigation or that the records were unrelated to it.

Other Federal Charges of Obstruction of Justice in an Investigation

Although Section 1519 of the United States Code forbids interfering with physical evidence in an investigation, Section 1510 of the United States Code prohibits preventing witnesses and victims from reporting crimes or cooperating with law enforcement. Interfering with a victim in a criminal investigation will result in a sentence of up to five years in prison.

The prosecution must show, as with most obstruction of justice charges, that a defendant acted with the intent to block the course of a criminal investigation.

Bribing others in order to postpone or discourage them from informing law enforcement about a crime that has been committed is illegal. Offering a reward to a suspect or eyewitness in return for their silence, for example, would be considered obstructing a criminal investigation.

The condition isn't always clear. Financial institutions and insurance providers, for example, are prohibited from notifying an individual when they receive a government subpoena for that person's information. These organizations are therefore unable to notify the individual of the information they generated in response to the subpoena.

Charges of Federal Obstruction of Justice in a Court Case

Other common obstruction charges are directed at the conduct that occurs after an investigation turns into a trial. Meddling with a jury, bribing a court official, and witness tampering are among the allegations.

1. Intimidating or injuring a juror or court officer

It is a crime to "influence, harass, or impede" a juror or "officer of the court" under 18 USC. Section 1503. The government must prove the following in order to prosecute anyone of this crime:

Some contact or action aimed at the jury or other parties involved in the case
Intentional attempt to sway the outcome of the case

Any process of a trial or hearing, including jury deliberations on a verdict, a judge's decision on a motion, or a probation officer's recommendation during sentencing, is referred to as "proceedings."

What is the difference between controlling, threatening, and impeding? Courts have upheld convictions under this statute for bribery, harassment, and attempting to sway a juror through a shared family member or acquaintance, among other things.

However, the rule applies to more than only jurors and court officers. The statute also makes it illegal to intervene with "the proper administration of justice." Courts have interpreted this ambiguous term to include deleting subpoenaed records, shielding a witness from authorities (even though the witness consents), and, in one instance, writing newspaper articles critical of the judge because the government proved the newspaper editor behaved with the real intent to obstruct the investigation.

In a criminal proceeding, there are other types of federal obstruction of justice claims. Attempting to sway a jury by giving them a written message, for example, will result in a six-month sentence. Other obstruction offenses carry maximum sentences of one year and five years, respectively, for interfering with a court order and forging court records.

2. Being a Witness to Tampering

Tampering with a witness in a criminal investigation or trial is one of the most popular types of federal obstruction of justice charges under 18 USC. Section 1512, tampering with a witness is a crime, as is tampering with a suspect or a government informant.

Witness tampering is described by the law as attacking a witness, threatening a witness, or otherwise "corruptly persuading" a witness to change their story or avoid testifying, such as by bribing them. A clause in the law prohibits interfering with facts.

Under 18 USC 1512, there are at least six different forms of witness tampering charges that can be filed, each with its own set of penalties:

Murdering a witness or victim in order to keep them from testifying, providing evidence, or interacting with the authorities is punishable by up to life in prison.
Using or threatening to use physical force against a witness or victim in order to sway their testimony or avoid their appearance in court is punishable by up to 30 years in jail.
Threatening to use physical force against a witness or victim in order to manipulate or postpone their testimony, avoid their presence in court, or force them to falsify evidence is punishable by up to 20 years in jail.
Bribing a witness or victim in order to postpone or manipulate their testimony, avoid their presence in court, or compel them to falsify evidence is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
Harassing a witness or victim with the intent of delaying or preventing them from testifying or appearing in court will result in a sentence of up to three years in prison.
Tampering with facts, such as modifying, destroying, or concealing a record, document, or other tangible objects with the intent to hinder or delay a court proceeding will result in a 20-year prison sentence.

Seek a Criminal Law Attorney for a more detailed rundown of what comprises tampering. Consider one of our prescreened California Lawyers in your Cal Bar Attorney Search.

Defending Against an Obstruction Charge

Defendants accused of resisting arrest can raise one or more of the defenses listed below. The burden of proof for these defenses varies by state.

Defense # 1: Unlawful Arrest

When most people think of a police officer making a false arrest, they think of an arrest that isn't backed up by facts. However, this is not the criterion for determining if the police wrongfully arrested an individual. The police must operate without permission or outside the limits of their powers in order to commit a false arrest.

Consider someone who is arrested by the police based on the sworn testimony of another person. Proof later revealed that the sworn statement was false. On the other hand, the police behaved reasonably in making the arrest as long as a judge considered the allegation reasonable at the time and issued a warrant based on it. There is no case of false arrest against the cops in this scenario because they have the right to arrest someone they reasonably suspect of committing a crime.

Consider the case where a police officer charges someone for insulting the officer or doing something the officer didn't like. Insulting a police officer is not a felony, and unless the officer has some reason to charge you, you are breaking the law. A prosecutor could charge the officer with making a false arrest, but this is unlikely.

False Arrest Civil Damages

People who have credible charges of false arrest will sue the individual who restrained them in civil court. Their point is that they have been affected in the same way that car accident victims have been harmed. The embarrassment of being restrained, any physical repercussions, and even the victim's reputation may all be considered harmful.

If a security guard unlawfully detains you, for example, the guard may have committed the crime of false arrest. You may also sue the guard (or the store) for damages regardless of whether the state decides to prosecute the guard with a crime.

Defense #2: Violation of Your Right

This may occur in a variety of ways, including a violation of your Miranda Rights or police conducting an unlawful search and seize of you or your belongings. These are referred to as "technical" defenses because they do not indicate that you are not guilty of a crime; rather, they are defenses to the evidence that was gathered and that we would contend could not be used against you in court.

When police have put you under arrest and begun interviewing you, they are generally expected to read your rights to you. The right to remain silent is the most significant of these. If they fail to read certain rights to you while you are being held and interrogated, the court will consider it a violation of your rights, and your claims will be dismissed. Keep in mind; however, that police officers are not required to read you your Miranda Warning. You will easily be arrested and taken to the police station. Miranda can not save you if you are not being investigated and are in police custody (typically in handcuffs).

A denial of your Fourth Amendment rights may also be a problem. This is generally challenged under PC 1538.5, which is a motion brought and argued in court in California.

During a DUI stop, this is a normal occurrence. Anything that happens after that is not admissible against you in court unless the police have Probable Cause to pull you over. That would be an unlawful search if you left a bar and police saw you, wanted to track you, and then stopped you because you left a bar. During these DUI arrests, police often find an excuse to stop you, even though that isn't the case. As a result, video evidence of the suspected traffic infringement is critical in situations like these. If the police did not have Probable Cause to stop your car, anything that happened after that – including your DUI detention – would be thrown out, and your case would be dismissed.

Your Criminal Law Attorney will know how to defend you in these circumstances.

Defense #3: Insufficient Evidence

In criminal defense, the most common defense is that there isn't enough evidence to convict you of the crime. This may be the result of overzealous cops and prosecutors who are overconfident in their skills. It's quite possible that someone is lying and blaming you in order to achieve something unrelated. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time may also be a mistake.

It doesn't have to be about lying all of the time, but one of the most critical aspects of crimes, in general, is that they all include elements that demonstrate the execution of a criminal act. Simply put, if a crime requires four elements, three of which are proven, but one of which is not, you are not guilty of that charge. Elements vary from factors in that all elements must be fulfilled in order to complete the task, while factors do not need to be seen in their entirety.

Defense #4: Self-defense

Officers have the right to use as much force as they need to make the arrest under the circumstances. However, if the arresting officer acts aggressively and without cause, the arrestee has the right to defend himself and resist the arrest. If a law enforcement officer unjustifiably shoots an arrestee, for example, the arrestee can fight back. The person who is being arrested is not allowed to act violently against the arresting officer unless the officer first acts violently.

Importantly, the arrestee must maintain self-control, resisting the arrest with only the force reasonably required under the circumstances. For example, if an arrestee subdues a police officer who has behaved inappropriately, the arrestee cannot hurt the officer any more.

CPC 148(a) & Plea Bargaining

Resisting arrest is often the starting point for plea bargains in California criminal court since CPC 148(a)(1) is linked to many other offenses. A plea deal requires a person convicted of one crime to confess to another, which is usually less severe. Pleas of Disturbing The Peace (CPC 415) or Trespass (CPC 602) are often acknowledged when CPC148(a)(1) is the penalty.

Defendants should not necessarily initiate plea bargains, but this is commonly the case. A plea bargain may be more convenient, less humiliating, and less expensive for the defendant. It can also be advantageous if the facts of the case are unfavorable to the prosecution. However, a prosecutor could accept a Criminal Law Attorney's offer to mitigate a charge in return for a defendant agreeing to plead guilty to a specific charge if the prosecutor believes he or she has a reasonable chance of winning the case.

Plea bargaining will take a long time and be costly, and even then, the judge must consider the plea as "in the interests of justice." Remember that a good Criminal Law Attorney can persuade a prosecutor to take a plea deal because you have no previous criminal record, or because you're young, or because you were provoked, or simply because it's not "in the interests of justice" to convict you with anything else.

Is deleting your phone's memory considered an obstruction of justice?

Prosecutors can search your cellphone for evidence if you are being investigated for a crime. Smartphones are tiny portable computers that fit comfortably in the palm of your hand. In reality, the United States Court of Appeals ruled that a smartphone is a device in the United States v. Neil Scott Kramer case.

Law enforcement and prosecutors are well aware that cellphones are brimming with personal data in today's world. A smartphone, in particular, can contain more personal information than a computer. As a result, the details on your cellphone would be extremely important in your situation.

As a result, deleting your phone's memory while under investigation may be considered an obstruction of justice.

Related Offenses

Obstructing or resisting a peace officer is a serious offense.

When an individual attempts to deter or hinder an "executive officer," California's law against Obstructing Or Resisting A Peace Officer (CPC 69(a)) applies. Threats or intimidation are used to deter employees from performing their job duties. There are limits to the law's implementation, just as there are to CPC 148. Taking a photo of an executive officer conducting duties, for example, is legal as long as you have a right to be there. If a police officer is making an unlawful arrest or using unreasonable force, you have the right to resist.
If you're found guilty of obstructing or resisting a peace officer, you may face the following penalties:

A maximum sentence of one (1) year in a county jail
A fine may be imposed.
Both a fine and incarceration are possible penalties.

A Peace Officer Was Assaulted

CPC 243 has two parts that are particularly important to Battery On A Peace Officer. The first, Section 243(b), applies if you commit battery against someone working in one of a number of occupations and know (or should fairly know) that they are performing job duties.
If you're convicted under CPC 243(b), you could face the following penalties:

A maximum sentence of one (1) year in county jail
A fine may be imposed.
Both a fine and incarceration are possible penalties.

CPC 243(c) refers to someone who commits a Battery that causes harm to one of the people mentioned in the section. Again, the battered person must be performing his or her job duties lawfully when the battery happens, and you must know (or fairly should know) that he or she is doing so at the moment.
If you're convicted of a Felony under CPC 243(c), you could face the following penalties:

A sentence to county prison for sixteen (16) months, two (2) years, or three (3) years.
A fine may be imposed.
Both a fine and incarceration are possible penalties.

Find A Criminal Lawyer in California

1000Attorneys.com is a California Bar Association Certified Free Attorney Referral Service that can refer you to an experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer. You will be referred to a Criminal Law Attorney best fit to handle your unique case. You can contact us through our 24/7 live chat (or complete our case details submission form) for a free initial consultation.