Citable Offense

[camaroguy2012]

In order for it to be a criminal threats he would have to threaten to kill you would have to have a reasonable fear of it happening, ill beat you up or ill kick your *** dont qualify as threats. And no u being in the vehicle and them hitting the vehicle doesnt qualify as hitting you

[jdubs71]

I'm looking for a PC that would warrant a ticket/arrest for touching another persons vehicle. Touching, would be defined by someone who pounds/bangs/slaps on the window, top, or side of said vehicle, without causing any damage.

Used in this context, person A is upset with person B. Person B is in a vehicle and person A touches persons B car, in the manor above.

Did this happen to me? Yes. Crazy people out there...

Not sure if they would apply given this exact situation, but read 10852 and or 10853 of the velhicle code. I don't remember all the elements, but 10852 deals with tampering with a vehicle and 10853 deals with climbing in or onto for the purpose of committing malicious mischief. It's likely a long shot in this case.

[RickD427]

In order for it to be a criminal threats he would have to threaten to kill you would have to have a reasonable fear of it happening, ill beat you up or ill kick your *** dont qualify as threats. And no u being in the vehicle and them hitting the vehicle doesnt qualify as hitting you

You're quite correct that statements such as "I'll beat you up" or "I'll kick your a**" do not meet the threshold to violate section 422.

But at the same time, section 422 is not limited only to threats of death. The threat can also be for "Great Bodily Injury". The creation of "Reasonable Fear" is insufficient for a violation. The threat must produce a "Sustained Fear" before the crime is committed.

Here is the text of Penal Code section 422. You can tell that it was very narrowly written in order to survive a First Amendment challenge. There's an awful lot that has to be proven before there is a violation:

"Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear

[FLIGHT762]

10852 is usually used in cases of attempted theft of a vehicle (10851CVC) and in cases where the vehicle was not locked and there was a theft or attempted theft of contents / parts. 10852 wouldn't apply in someone hitting the vehicle as described by the O/P with no damage.

Reference here: http://www.greghillassociates.com/la...y-2019772.html

[Jwood562]

attempted burglary.

they tried to gain entry to your locked vehicle to harm you. sell it OP!

[hermosabeach]

Cool story bro ahead-

Guy on a bicycle spits on an unoccupied police vehicle outside a courthouse.

Guy is hooked and eventually cited for not having a warning device/ horn/ bell on the bike.

The question you might ask is how to deal with Jerks..

[oddjob]

I'm going to guess that many counties are like San Joaquin County. OP mentioned "without damage".

My guess.....No charge at all....

[Victor Cachat]

Camera system.
It shows the cops what happened and keeps you from bothering them if you know it will show you are at fault.

[LtJim]

Oh this is simple !
836.3
Fill in your next charge:
Fill out the 180
Tow his car
Let the WC 849b2
Or DA Reject
10-8

[jdubs71]

10852 is usually used in cases of attempted theft of a vehicle (10851CVC) and in cases where the vehicle was not locked and there was a theft or attempted theft of contents / parts. 10852 wouldn't apply in someone hitting the vehicle as described by the O/P with no damage.

Reference here: http://www.greghillassociates.com/la...y-2019772.html

I agree. That's the only times I've ever used them and it wasn't very often.

[Cokebottle]

This one just screams for a parody thread.....
"My jacket got caught in some guy's door and he tried to drive off."
"I tried to get his attention slapping and pounding on his roof, door, and glass, being careful not to cause any damage....."

[ptmn]

I got that one covered. Hook him/her for 664/594 PC, attempted vandalism. If you on viewed and you can articulate the subject was attempting to cause damage. Not sure if you can use 664 with a VC vio (10852) or not, I would have to look into it.

[RickD427]

I got that one covered. Hook him/her for 664/594 PC, attempted vandalism. If you on viewed and you can articulate the subject was attempting to cause damage. Not sure if you can use 664 with a VC vio (10852) or not, I would have to look into it.

If the person simply touched the car, you're going to have a hard time with the 664/594 approach. You have to show that there was an "attempt" to do the vandalism. In short you have to show that the suspect tried to damage the car and was prevented from doing so.

For the long discourse version of "attempt", please refer to People v Chance (Reporter not available, California Supreme Court issued 08/18/2008) and People v Superior Court (Reporter not available, issued by California Court of Appeal, Second District on 11/17/2004).

For the watch commander's short version of "attempt" the suspect had to start the crime and something other than the suspect had to stop the crime. If you've got a good answer for what stopped the crime, then you have a good 664/594.

Penal Code section 664 applies to "any crime". It's application is not limited to the Penal Code.

[camaroguy2012]

Also keep in mind OP that anything of a misd offense that an officer doesnt witness you will be on the hook for a citizens arrest

[ifilef]

Assault (civil, though arguable) & battery (civil, and likely criminal). Vehicle is an extension of the person and if occupied and the touching is offensive, it's at least a civil if not criminal battery, also. Did not check PC.