I would like opinions on the following. I believe it is arrestable but there are differing opinions.

Officer goes to domestic violence call where husband calls and wife is aggressor. Wife is drunk and mean. Husband is timid and does not claim pain but has obvious red mark leading officers to believe assault by contact (Class C) has occured but the officer cannot substantiate Class A Family Violence. In order to separate the two parties, this is a persistient issue at this residence, the officer arrests and transports wife for Class C - Assault by Contact.

Supervisors tell officer that it was a bad arrest because, according CCP, the offense did not occur in his presence or in his view. Officer states that neither did the Class A that the supervisor indicates is okay to arrest for.

Opinions, please.

The CCP was amended in 2005 to allow those arrests:

Art. 14.03. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICERS. (a) Any peace officer may arrest, without warrant:
(1) persons found in suspicious places and under circumstances which reasonably show that such persons have been guilty of some felony, violation of Title 9, Chapter 42, Penal Code, breach of the peace, or offense under Section 49.02, Penal Code, or threaten, or are about to commit some offense against the laws;
(2) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have committed an assault resulting in bodily injury to another person and the peace officer has probable cause to believe that there is danger of further bodily injury to that person;
(3) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have committed an offense defined by Section 25.07, Penal Code (violation of Protective Order), or by Section 38.112, Penal Code (violation of Protective Order issued on basis of sexual assault), if the offense is not committed in the presence of the peace officer;
(4) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have committed an offense involving family violence;
(5) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have prevented or interfered with an individual's ability to place a telephone call in an emergency, as defined by Section 42.062(d), Penal Code, if the offense is not committed in the presence of the peace officer; or
(6) a person who makes a statement to the peace officer that would be admissible against the person under Article 38.21 and establishes probable cause to believe that the person has committed a felony.

If the officer has PC for the arrest in a F/V case, then they can make it. There is no difference in CCP between a M/A F/V charge and a M/C F/V charge in such instance.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bgreer:
The CCP was amended in 2005 to allow those arrests:

Art. 14.03. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICERS. (a) Any peace officer may arrest, without warrant:
(1) persons found in suspicious places and under circumstances which reasonably show that such persons have been guilty of some felony, violation of Title 9, Chapter 42, Penal Code, breach of the peace, or offense under Section 49.02, Penal Code, or threaten, or are about to commit some offense against the laws;
(2) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have committed an assault resulting in bodily injury to another person and the peace officer has probable cause to believe that there is danger of further bodily injury to that person;
(3) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have committed an offense defined by Section 25.07, Penal Code (violation of Protective Order), or by Section 38.112, Penal Code (violation of Protective Order issued on basis of sexual assault), if the offense is not committed in the presence of the peace officer;
_(4) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have committed an offense involving family violence;_
(5) persons who the peace officer has probable cause to believe have prevented or interfered with an individual's ability to place a telephone call in an emergency, as defined by Section 42.062(d), Penal Code, if the offense is not committed in the presence of the peace officer; or
(6) a person who makes a statement to the peace officer that would be admissible against the person under Article 38.21 and establishes probable cause to believe that the person has committed a felony.

---

In this particular case, regardless of my previous statement, the officer may have the PC to make the arrest for the M/A arrest. Even though the "victim" makes no claim of bodily injury, if the officer can substantiate a valid argument that an F/V offense occurred with the suspect as the actor and/or that an offense will occur if no action is taken, then the arrest is valid. Keeping in mind that I'm just a dumb street cop with no law school education, I would presume that no subsequent prosecution would hold up. From my experience, the DA's office will refuse the charges and let the actor walk after a few days in the slammer if there is not a victim willing to testify.

Although it may be a good case and a good arrest, the case will most likely not make it through the system because of previously stated reasons. As a note to the arresting officer (which I assume the OP is), I doubt that you will hear anything negative about it in the future. You did your job within the law to see that there was no furtherance of F/V by making the arrest. Too bad for the arrestee that she didn't decide that it would be best to call a friend and sleep off the booze on her couch.