Other Criminal Charges & Offenses Disturbing the peace, elements of

T

tiedRight

New Member
Jurisdiction
Louisiana
Can the following statute be interpreted to apply to one neighbor yelling at another neighbor while each neighbor is in his own yard? If so, how so?

LA Rev Stat § 14:103 (2017)
SUBPART C. OFFENSES AFFECTING THE
GENERAL PEACE AND ORDER
§103. Disturbing the peace
A. Disturbing the peace is the doing of any of the following in such manner as would foreseeably disturb or alarm the public:
(1) Engaging in a fistic encounter; or
(2) Addressing any offensive, derisive, or annoying words to any other person who is lawfully in any street, or other public place; or call him by any offensive or derisive name, or make any noise or exclamation in his presence and hearing with the intent to deride, offend, or annoy him, or to prevent him from pursuing his lawful business, occupation, or duty; or
(3) Appearing in an intoxicated condition; or
(4) Engaging in any act in a violent and tumultuous manner by any three or more persons; or
(5) Holding of an unlawful assembly; or
(6) Interruption of any lawful assembly of people; or
(7) Intentionally engaging in any act or any utterance, gesture, or display designed to disrupt a funeral, funeral route, or burial of a deceased
person during the period beginning one hundred twenty minutes before and ending one hundred twenty minutes after the funeral or burial, within
three hundred feet of the funeral or burial.
(8)(a) Intentionally blocking, impeding, inhibiting, or in any other manner obstructing or interfering with a funeral route.
(b) Intentionally blocking, impeding, inhibiting, or in any other manner obstructing or interfering, within five hundred feet, with access into or
from any building or parking lot of a building in which a funeral or burial is being conducted, or any burial plot or the parking lot of the
cemetery in which a funeral or burial is being conducted, during the period beginning one hundred twenty minutes before and ending one
hundred twenty minutes after the funeral or burial.
B.(1) Whoever commits the crime of disturbing the peace shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than
ninety days, or both.
(2) Whoever commits the crime of disturbing the peace as provided for in Paragraphs (A)(7) and (8) of this Section shall be fined not more than
five hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
C. For purposes of Paragraphs (A)(7) and (8) of this Section:
(1) "Funeral" includes a funeral, funeral home viewing, wake, or memorial service.
(2) "Funeral route" means the route of ingress or egress from the location of a funeral or burial, including thirty feet from the outer edge of the
outside lane of the route.
Amended by Acts 1960, No. 70, §1; Acts 1963, No. 93, §1; Acts 1968, No. 647, §1; Acts 1979, No. 222, §1; Acts 2006, No. 805, §1; Acts 2013,
No. 30, §1, eff. May 29, 2013.
 
tiedRight said:
Can the following statute be interpreted to apply to one neighbor yelling at another neighbor while each neighbor is in his own yard?
Click to expand...

YES.

tiedRight said:
If so, how so?
Click to expand...

Yelling is defined as:
to shout something or make a loud noise, usually when you are angry, in pain, or excited:
Our neighbors were yelling (obscenities) at each other this morning.
OR =
The child yelled out in pain.

Yelling requires raising your voice. Raising your voice does not mean you are yelling, but it won't matter if the person receiving your message is put off or upset by your tone.

Yelling is further clarified and explained in the statute at:

(2) Addressing any offensive, derisive, or annoying words to any other person who is lawfully in any street, or other public place; or call him by any offensive or derisive name, or make any noise or exclamation in his presence and hearing with the intent to deride, offend, or annoy him, or to prevent him from pursuing his lawful business, occupation, or duty; or

Be smart, don't disturb the public peace by raising your voice to more than a normal conversational tone.

What does that mean?

If one possesses common sense, the meaning is very clear.

Don't shout, speak in a normal, conversational voice.

It also depends on what is being YELLED.

If Jane is yelling a WARNING to Sally, "Beware, the police are hunting a child rapist, take your kids in the house!!!", would be far different than Jane yelling to Sally, "Leave my husband alone, you horny cow. If you keep flirting with him, I'm gonna kick you in your ugly face, you sneaky bovine!"

Context and circumstance always matter mate.

An exigent circumstance versus a neighborhood beef could explain raised voices.

tiedRight said:
If so, how so?
Click to expand...

If peace officer deems your voice to be too loud, you'll probably be charged.

A charge doesn't mean you're guilty, because everyone is INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY in a court of law.

However, MOST people KNOW exactly what that means and don't require a lawyer to
" 'splain' it to he/she/thee".

As my kindergarten teacher, Mrs. Fairly, would often say, "Shhh, children use your inside voice".
 
Thank you for the response. Certainly informative and I would like to pursue this a little further.

What if the "yelling" was done over the noise of a large barking dog?

Also, what if the person who's peace was allegedly disturbed did not show any outward signs of their peace being disturbed?

And, what if the alleged disturbed person was offering hand gestures during the discourse including a "thumbs up" which could have been taken as, 'speak up I cant hear you' or 'yes I agree'?

Thirdly "foreseeably" is defined as "capable of being anticipated". How could an individual be "capable" of anticipating that another would find yelling a disturbance of their peace when their large dog is already barking loudly and aggressively?
 
tiedRight said:
What if the "yelling" was done over the noise of a large barking dog?

Also, what if the person who's peace was allegedly disturbed did not show any outward signs of their peace being disturbed?

And, what if the alleged disturbed person was offering hand gestures during the discourse including a "thumbs up" which could have been taken as, 'speak up I cant hear you' or 'yes I agree'?

Thirdly "foreseeably" is defined as "capable of being anticipated". How could an individual be "capable" of anticipating that another would find yelling a disturbance of their peace when their large dog is already barking loudly and aggressively?
Click to expand...


If you NEED or REQUIRE more information, I suggest you make an appointment with three or four criminal defense lawyers in your county.

No need to worry about the cost, as MOST attorneys will meet with a potential client at no charge during the INITIAL meeting to assess the client's case and understand her/his concerns.

You can prepare a list of questions in advance to make sure you use the 20-30 minutes wisely.

As far as DISTURBING the PEACE is concerned, a citizen is deemed to know what that means.

There are exceptions, such as a 45 year old male with the IQ of a 2 year old toddler.

Another exception MIGHT be a mentally disturbed, 55 year old female, recently discharged from a state mental institution.

Children, especially YOUNGER children are also exceptions as to being incapable of violating our criminal laws.

If the child were 5 years old and couldn't find her mother, so she starts crying, screaming, "I want mommy. Where is mommy?" She might even throw her ball, garden tolls, etc...

Again, I suggest you use common sense.

This isn't, nor will it ever be, a matter to be decided by an appellate court.



I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea.
 
"As far as DISTURBING the PEACE is concerned, a citizen is deemed to know what that means."

Yes, the average individual does know what disturbing the peace is however, it seems there are no law makers that know a barking dog is a disturbance of the peace.

For some reason when "barking dog" is mentioned people fall into one of two groups, there is a problem or there is no problem.

I suggest anyone interested go to "barkingdog.com" and get the science behind why our laws favor barking dogs and how detrimental barking dogs are to human health. Didn't the military use barking dogs at Abugrad (spelling ??) as a form of torture?

I was threatened by my neighbor with a knife in his hand in an argument over his dogs. Though I have no doubt that he would love to murder me, he will not do so in broad daylight. I did not even report the incident. When I did report the disturbance of the peace the dogs were creating to the police they came out and informed me that barking dogs are not against the law.

Consider this. A person makes a threat they may or may not follow through but, they will almost certainly be charged with the threat, not so when a dog is barking aggressively. Yet, consider what an aggressive barking dog is saying – it is saying 'I will maul you, I will kill you, I will eat you alive.' And dogs mean it yet, dogs are seldom if ever addressed until they actually bit, maul or kill. So, a question that should be made to be answered is: why are lawmakers not addressing the growing dog problem? When the police encounter a dog they have an issue with they just kill it so, they don't have a problem with dogs, the problem with dogs is placed squarely on top of the masses who do not bully their neighbors with lawmaker sanctioned dysfunctional dog laws.

Thank you for your time and insight.
 
Last edited:
Let me get this straight. You were threatened with a knife but didn't report it. Some time later you reported barking dogs.

That makes no sense.

It appears that we can be of no further help to you so I'm closing the thread.
 
Barking dogs do not seem to be covered by the text of the statute you cited, but you might find local ordinances that specifically address barking dogs or other loud noises that create a public nuisance.

The bigger issue here is the neighbor threatening you with a knife.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top