Massachusetts high court hears challenge to juveniles' resisting-arrest convictions and scope of statute

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard argument on whether resisting-arrest adjudications of several juveniles should be vacated and how the state statute should be read to account for First Amendment activity, attorneys told the justices.

The cases arise from a street confrontation in which students recorded officers and several juveniles were arrested. Counsel for the juveniles urged the court to require a tighter reading of the resisting-arrest statute’s elements — particularly the “color of law” and the degree of force or risk necessary to support a conviction — and to recognize that protected speech can negate the Commonwealth’s burden on the color-of-law element.

Attorney Trane Johnson, representing Friedrich F., told the court that “the Commonwealth cannot meet its burden on the color of law element if the person arrested was exercising their clearly protected First Amendment rights.” Johnson emphasized that video evidence, he said, undercut key officer testimony and that much of the charged behavior involved criticism and recording of officers rather than conduct that rose to the level of tumult or dangerous interference.

Michelle Mungen, arguing for juvenile…