Resistance

A woman who claimed she was engaged in “passive resistance” when she refused to show proof of her train fare and kept walking after a police officer ordered her to stop was properly convicted of interfering with a police officer, an appeals court in Oregon ruled, finding that “walking away is active, not passive, conduct.”

SALEM, Ore. — A woman who claimed she was engaged in “passive resistance” when she refused to show proof of her train fare and kept walking after a police officer ordered her to stop was properly convicted of interfering with a police officer, an appeals court in Oregon ruled, finding that “walking away is active, not passive, conduct.”

Categories / Appeals, Criminal, Government

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Resistance

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Additional Reads