People v. Bartz

Decided April 23, 1884

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1884-04-23

Breach of the peace “in the presence of an officer.” 1. The wanton discharge of a firearm in the public street of a city is a breach of the peace. 2. A breach of the peace is committed “in the presence of an officer,” though done at some distance from him, and in the dark, if he can detect the act, and could see the person doing it if it were light.

Cited in Black's (1910)’s definition of “Breach” · Black's (1910)’s definition of “Breach of the peace”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Conviction affirmed · Decided 1884-04-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1960

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Campbell, J.

¶1I concur in sustaining the conviction, inasmuch as the court confined it to a common assault. I have no doubt the assault on the officer, whether the arrest was legal or not, was such as to expose the respondent to the responsibility of an unlawful attack.

¶2But I do not think that the mere firing of a pistol in the street, without the purpose of doing harm to any one, is in any sense to be regarded as a breach of the peace. Had the conviction been for resisting a lawful arrest, I do not think the facts would have sustained it.