Citizens Arrest - Pro and Con

[BigJim_610]

What are the pro and cons for making a citizens arrest? It seems there could be some civil liability if things were to go south.

[retired]

837PC. A private person may arrest another:
1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.
2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not
in his presence.
3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable
cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

Ok, so there is the section that explains it, but you are correct, you could be civilly liable if the arrest was not a good one. It might be better in most cases to just call the local lea.

[9mmepiphany]

you're making the arrest, because you believe a crime has been committed. if you're wrong, you are completely responsible for any damage, pain or suffering.

having seen how many times people are mistaken when they think an arrestable crime has occurred...i would be very careful

[CSDGuy]

Even if the arrest IS good, you should expect to be sued. There are no protections from civil suit, no immunity for the private person who arrests another. The problem with $#2 and #3 is that the person who is arresting another has to know that a felony actually has been committed. If no felony was actually committed, even if you think (reasonable suspicion) the person committed an offense... then the "arrest" is an unlawful act...

Oops...

Be VERY careful if you're doing a Private Person's Arrest.

[BigDogatPlay]

And if you have to use force to effect the private person's arrest, and it turns out to be a less than good arrest,the civil stakes go up exponentially. There is no good faith or hold harmless in private person's arrest for the private person.

Call the local LEA. If the officer says you can CA, then consider it carefully.

[1911su16b870]

Most times: Be a good witness. Watch and take the mental notes of the subjects description (size-weight, hair, skin, clothing), vehicle, license plate, what happened, where it happened, direction of travel, and get this info out to the 911 operator.

In the cases of an attack on you/loved one or another innocent that you step in for, then do whatever you need to to get out of that situation (escape or nuetralizing the threat) plus getting the above info out.

[HokeySon]

coming at this from a different angle and having handled civil cases after the CA, I would say not to make a CA under nearly all circs. Report it to LEA and let them do their job. AND make it clear that is what you are doing to the responding officers. You are reporting suspicious activity for them to investigate. Let them make the arrest if it is warranted.
Hard case comes when LEO says to civilian that the civilian can make a CA and suggests that civilian do so. If I were in that situation, I would tell the officer to arrest the perp on their own authority if they thought there was an offense, but that I would not do a CA.
your mileage may vary and this is not legal advice.

PS: reporting suspicious activity or a possible crime to the responsible authorities is privileged and cannot form the basis of legal liability in most circumstances.

[BigJim_610]

But if a crime has been committed

And LEO did not witness the crime, then what?

In my friends case a family member assaulted and injured another family member. LEO was called and they asked for consent to arrest the violent member. I blurted out that I would almost never consent to a CA. The friend signed the CA form.

coming at this from a different angle and having handled civil cases after the CA, I would say not to make a CA under nearly all circs. Report it to LEA and let them do their job. AND make it clear that is what you are doing to the responding officers. You are reporting suspicious activity for them to investigate. Let them make the arrest if it is warranted.
Hard case comes when LEO says to civilian that the civilian can make a CA and suggests that civilian do so. If I were in that situation, I would tell the officer to arrest the perp on their own authority if they thought there was an offense, but that I would not do a CA.
your mileage may vary and this is not legal advice.

PS: reporting suspicious activity or a possible crime to the responsible authorities is privileged and cannot form the basis of legal liability in most circumstances.

[HokeySon]

In most cases, LEO does not have to actually witness crimes and can rely on witnesses/ other evidence to arrest. As I said, personally, if the LEO has decided there is not enough evidence for the LEO to make the arrest, I am not going to do it myself. I mean if the witnesses say there has been an assault with injuries, the LEO can make the arrest if he/she feels that the witnesses are reliable, telling the truth etc.

But your question goes a bit beyond my experience. All I can tell you is that the legal bills on the civil side are huge -- and I personally would exercise other avenues like, if I cannot remove the perp from the area, remove myself and my family from the immediate potential threat and later get a restraining order in the civil courts. Can't tell you what do here, but it sounds like you are properly wary of a CA too.

[SVT-40]

LEO's can only make arrests on misdemeanor crimes which occur in their presence and felonies which did not occur in their presence. Domestic violence, DUI and a few other crimes (I can't remember which) are the only misdemeanor crimes where LEO's can make an arrest where they did not actually see the crime comitted.

In general I believe private persons arrests offer to much liability for the person making the arrest. The route to prosecution without a PP arrest is through the process of having a report written and submitted to the DA's office for filing. If there is enough evidence the DA will file the case and issue a arrest warrant for the suspect.

One other thing LEO's are no longer bound to accept every PP arrest. If the LEO believes the arrest is groundless he can refuse the arrest. This is a change from the past where LEO's were required to accept every PParrest regardless of how baseless it was.

In addition the LEO who accept the PP arrest from a person he has the option to cite release the "arrestee" in the field and release him immediatly. There is no requirement for booking in 837 P.C.

[9mmepiphany]

I mean if the witnesses say there has been an assault with injuries, the LEO can make the arrest if he/she feels that the witnesses are reliable, telling the truth etc

that's the key and almost never in the case of a misdemeanor

[HokeySon]

tangential question:

I understand the misdemeanor standard of having to be in the presence of the LEO. But an assault and battery with injuries?? ... could arrest for felony even if no weapon involved right? (assuming reliable witness, observable facts consistent with witness story etc.)

[9mmepiphany]

assuming no domestic violence, it's at the officers discretion...based on witness statements, observable facts and injuries

[bfoster]

California Penal Code 243(d):

(d) When a battery is committed against any person and serious
bodily injury is inflicted on the person, the battery is punishable
by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or
imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

Serious bodily injury makes the battery a "wobbler" which can either be charged as a felony or a misdemeanor. This means a LEO can arrest in California based on probable cause to believe a felony has been committed. Serious bodily injury can include things such as a laceration that requires stiches, loss of consciouness, broken bones etc. If the battery does not cause serious bodily injury, was not DV, was not committed by a juvenile, or was not committed in the officer's presence, then the officer cannot arrest for the misdemeanor without a CA.

[bfoster]

The above is as I understand it anyhow