## Facts

- A Beloit police officer went to a residence to question a five-year-old child suspected of involvement in a bicycle theft.
- The child was seen near a bicycle and ran upstairs; a reporting juvenile identified the child as the person seen riding the stolen bicycle.
- The officer asked the child’s mother, Shonna Hobson, to permit questioning; she refused, told the officer to leave, and became agitated.
- Backup officers arrived and decided to arrest Hobson for obstructing an officer.
- When officers attempted to take Hobson into custody, she physically resisted and struck an officer in the face, resulting in a felony charge of battery to a peace officer.
- The circuit court found the officers lacked probable cause for the obstruction arrest and dismissed the felony battery charge on the theory that Wisconsin recognized a common-law privilege to resist an unlawful arrest absent unreasonable police force.
- On review, the State did not contest the lack of probable cause determination for the initial obstruction arrest and challenged only the legal basis for dismissing the battery charge.

## Issues

1. Whether Wisconsin common law recognized a privilege to forcibly resist an unlawful arrest when the arresting officer used no unreasonable force.
2. If such a privilege existed, whether the court should abolish it as a matter of public policy.
3. If abolished, whether the change should apply to conduct occurring before the decision.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that Wisconsin common law had recognized a privilege to forcibly resist an unlawful arrest in the absence of unreasonable force by the officer.
- The court abolished that common-law affirmative defense as a matter of public policy.
- The court applied the abolition prospectively only.
- Because Hobson’s conduct occurred before the change, the court affirmed dismissal of the felony battery-to-a-peace-officer charge.

## Legal Principles

- Historically in Wisconsin, a person could assert an affirmative defense of reasonable force to resist an unlawful arrest, so long as the officer did not use unreasonable force.
- Going forward, a person has no privilege to forcibly resist an arrest carried out with reasonable force, even if the arrest is later determined to be unlawful.
- Courts may modify or abolish common-law doctrines when warranted by public policy and the interests of justice.
- When a court abolishes a common-law defense, fairness and reliance interests may support prospective-only application.

## Conclusion

The court recognized that Wisconsin had previously permitted reasonable force to resist an unlawful arrest without unreasonable police force, but abolished that defense for future cases due to safety and the availability of post-arrest legal remedies; the change did not apply to Hobson’s earlier conduct, so the battery charge remained dismissed.


State v. Hobson, 577 N.W.2d 825 (Wis. 1998)