State v. Lowe

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 3916

Syllabus

RESISTING ARREST – EVIDENCE – CONTEMPT: Under R.C. 2921.33(A), no person, either recklessly or by force, is permitted to resist or interfere with his own lawful arrest. For purposes of a resisting-arrest offense, an arrest occurs when the following four requisite elements are present: (1) an intent to arrest, (2) under a real or pretended authority, (3) accompanied by an actual or constructive seizure or detention of the person, (4) which is so understood by the person arrested. Where the evidence showed that defendant had been informed less than four minutes before that the police were looking specifically for him to execute warrants for his arrest, and that his flight amounted to an obvious interference with his apprehension, the record contains substantial, credible evidence from which the trial court could have reasonably concluded that each element of resisting arrest had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, including that the police intended to arrest defendant and that defendant knew of that intention. To find that a contemnor has committed direct, criminal contempt a court need only determine, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the contemnor's misbehavior, conducted in the presence of the trial court acting in its judicial function, obstructed the administration of justice.