Instruction 7.370, Criminal Model Jury Instructions for Use in the District Court

INTERFERING WITH A POLICE OFFICER

(Common Law)

The defendant is charged with interfering with a police officer

engaged in the lawful performance of a duty. To prove this offense,

the Commonwealth must prove four elements beyond a reasonable

doubt.

First: That a police officer was engaged in the lawful

performance of a duty.

Second: That the defendant physically performed an act that

obstructed or hindered the police officer in the lawful performance of

that duty.

Third: That the defendant was aware that the police officer was

engaged in the performance of that duty; and

Fourth: That the defendant intended to obstruct or hinder the

officer in the performance of that duty.

To prove the first element, the Commonwealth must prove both

that the affected person was a police officer and that they were

lawfully performing their duty as a police officer.

To prove the second element, the Commonwealth must prove

the defendant either took physical action or made a threat of violence

against the officer that would reasonably obstruct or hinder the

officer in the performance of that duty.

To prove the third element, the Commonwealth must prove the

defendant was aware that the police officer was engaged in the

performance of their duty. This requires you to make a decision

about the defendant’s state of mind at that time. You should consider

all the evidence, and any reasonable inferences you draw from the

evidence, in determining whether the defendant knew the police

officer was engaged in the performance of that duty.

To prove the fourth element, the Commonwealth must prove the

defendant intended to obstruct or hinder the officer in the

performance of that duty. This requires you to make a decision about

the defendant’s state of mind at that time. You should consider all the

evidence, and any reasonable inferences you draw from the evidence,

in determining whether the defendant acted with the intent to obstruct

or hinder the officer in the performance of their duty.

Commonwealth v. Adams, 482 Mass. 514 (2019).

Note:

1. Sentencing. The sentencing range is governed by G.L. c. 279, § 5, which prescribes a

sentence that “conforms to the common usage and practice in the commonwealth.” Reference might be

had to the punishments set by statute for similar offenses such as Resisting Arrest (G.L. c. 268, § 32B)

and Assault and Battery on a Police Officer (G.L. c. 265, § 13D, para. 1).