Boston’s Criminal
Defense Lawyer
Defense Lawyer
Simple Assault and Battery vs. Domestic Assault and Battery in Massachusetts
Simple assault and battery under G.L. c. 265, § 13A and assault and battery on a family or household member under G.L. c. 265, § 13M punish the same physical act. Section 13A applies when the Commonwealth alleges an assault or an assault and battery on any other person. Section 13M applies when it alleges the same conduct against a person within § 13M(c)’s relationship definition. It is the charge the Commonwealth brings in most Massachusetts domestic violence cases.
A § 13M charge does not require physical contact. The statute covers both assault and assault and battery, so threatening conduct can support the charge when no touching occurred. Section 13M also contains a relationship element, a higher first-offense fine, a felony provision for a repeat offense, and a mandatory intimate partner abuse education program with two statutory exceptions.
A reduction from § 13M to § 13A can change the charge and some consequences, but it does not automatically resolve immigration, firearms, protective-order, licensing, or record issues. Those questions depend on the precise offense, the disposition, the underlying relationship, and any related court order. This page explains the distinctions. The Massachusetts domestic-violence defense page addresses the broader criminal and civil process. The § 13M page covers the family or household member charge in full.
What Is the Difference Between Simple and Domestic Assault and Battery?
| Issue | G.L. c. 265, § 13A(a) | G.L. c. 265, § 13M |
|---|---|---|
| Conduct | Assault or assault and battery | The same assault or assault and battery, plus the relationship element |
| Required relationship | No special relationship | Spouses or former spouses, people with a child in common, or people in a current or former substantive dating or engagement relationship |
| Ordinary first-offense maximum | Two and one-half years in a house of correction or a fine up to $1,000 | Two and one-half years in a house of correction, a fine up to $5,000, or both |
| Second or subsequent provision | No separate repeat-offense provision in § 13A(a) | Up to five years in state prison or two and one-half years in a house of correction |
| Certified program | Not required by § 13A(a) itself | Required for a violation or as a CWOF condition unless good cause is shown and the court makes written findings describing why intervention should not be ordered, or the program determines the defendant is unsuitable |
This comparison concerns ordinary § 13A(a) and § 13M charges. Section 13A(b) separately covers assault and battery causing serious bodily injury, assault and battery on a person the defendant knew or had reason to know was pregnant, and assault or assault and battery on a person the defendant knew was protected by a specified order then in effect. The firm’s page on domestic violence enhancements explains those aggravated charges. Other statutes apply when the Commonwealth alleges a dangerous weapon, strangulation, or another aggravating fact.
What Counts as Assault in Massachusetts?
Massachusetts recognizes attempted-battery and immediately-threatened-battery forms of assault. The current Superior Court model instruction on assault, issued in November 2025, uses these elements.
- Attempted battery. The defendant attempted to use physical force against another person, specifically intended to cause bodily harm, and came reasonably close to doing so. The other person need not have known about the attempt.
- Immediately threatened battery. The defendant intentionally committed an objectively menacing act, specifically intended to cause fear of immediate bodily harm, and caused the other person to experience that fear or recognize the immediate risk.
The District Court model instruction instead describes a battery as a harmful or unpermitted touching. The Superior Court instruction expressly notes that difference and states that no reported appellate decision has resolved whether an attempted or threatened nonharmful but offensive touching is enough. The charging theory and the instruction the judge uses therefore control the elements. Neither form requires completed contact, and words can give meaning to accompanying conduct.
What Counts as Assault and Battery?
Intentional Assault and Battery
For intentional assault and battery, the Commonwealth must prove an intentional touching that was harmful or offensive and occurred without legal right or excuse. A touching may be slight. When the theory is a nonharmful but offensive touching, lack of consent is what makes the touching offensive. The District Court model instruction for § 13A states the elements and the governing definitions.
Reckless Assault and Battery
Reckless assault and battery is different from accidental contact. The Commonwealth must prove that the defendant intentionally engaged in actions that caused bodily injury and that the conduct was reckless, not merely negligent. The injury must be sufficiently serious to interfere with the person’s health or comfort. Section 13M adds the qualifying relationship as another element when the charge involves a family or household member.
Who Is a Family or Household Member Under Section 13M?
For § 13M, “family or household member” means people who are or were married, have a child in common regardless of whether they married or lived together, or are or were in a substantive dating or engagement relationship. For a dating relationship, the factfinder considers its length and type, the frequency of interaction, whether either person ended it, and how much time has passed since it ended.
This definition is narrower than the definition in G.L. c. 209A, § 1. Chapter 209A also includes people who live or formerly lived in the same household and people related by blood or marriage. Roommates or relatives may therefore qualify for a 209A abuse-prevention order without satisfying § 13M(c). In a § 13M prosecution, the Commonwealth must prove the narrower criminal relationship beyond a reasonable doubt.
Penalties and the Intimate Partner Abuse Education Program
Ordinary assault or assault and battery under § 13A(a) is punishable by up to two and one-half years in a house of correction or a fine of up to $1,000. A first § 13M offense is punishable by the same maximum period of incarceration and a fine of up to $5,000, and the statute permits both. Neither provision creates a mandatory minimum jail sentence for the ordinary first offense. A second or subsequent § 13M offense is a felony punishable by up to five years in state prison or up to two and one-half years in a house of correction.
Under § 13M(d), after a conviction or as a condition of a continuance without a finding, the judge must order the intimate partner abuse education program unless the judge makes specific written findings of good cause or the program determines that the defendant is unsuitable. Section 13A(a) contains no program requirement.
Can a Section 13M Charge Be Reduced to Section 13A?
Sometimes, but a reduction is not automatic. It may reflect a dispute about the relationship element, an evidentiary problem, or a negotiated resolution. A § 13A disposition removes § 13M(c)’s relationship element and § 13M(d)’s statutory program provision from that count, although a court may impose other lawful conditions and related orders or records may remain.
A reduction should be evaluated by its actual legal effects, not by the shorter charge name. The firm’s detailed § 13M defense page addresses the family-or-household-member charge itself.
Does a Reduction Eliminate Immigration or Firearm Consequences?
Immigration Consequences
No charge label is automatically safe for a noncitizen. Under the definition in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A), federal immigration law generally treats a typical Massachusetts CWOF as a conviction because the defendant admits sufficient facts and the court imposes a penalty, restraint, or condition. Whether a disposition is a deportable crime of domestic violence under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i) still depends on the offense elements or branch, the conviction record, and the qualifying relationship.
The domestic relationship need not appear as an element of § 13A for immigration authorities to examine it separately. A qualifying protection-order violation may create a separate removability ground under § 1227(a)(2)(E)(ii) when a court determines that the conduct violated the part of the order protecting against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury. Reducing a criminal count does not erase that separate determination. Any proposed plea or CWOF should be reviewed with immigration counsel. The immigration consequences of Massachusetts charges and the CWOFs and other nontrial dispositions available are addressed separately.
Massachusetts and Federal Firearm Consequences
Current Massachusetts law treats a conviction for a misdemeanor punishable by more than two years as a firearm-licensing disqualifier. Because ordinary § 13A(a) and first-offense § 13M(a) each permit up to two and one-half years, a conviction under either statute can trigger G.L. c. 140, § 121F(j). For an FID card based only on that provision, the statute limits disqualification to five years from the later of conviction or release from confinement, probation, or parole. The same maximum also requires analysis under the federal definition in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20) and § 922(g)(1).
A qualifying misdemeanor domestic-violence conviction may create a separate federal prohibition under § 922(g)(9). Under United States v. Hayes, the underlying misdemeanor need not contain the domestic relationship as an element. The government may establish the relationship separately. Whether a § 13A conviction qualifies therefore depends on the offense branch, the required force, the relationship, and the conviction record. Reduction alone does not answer the federal question.
Commonwealth v. Erler holds that a Massachusetts CWOF is not a conviction under current Massachusetts firearms law, although it may support an individualized licensing-unsuitability finding. Separately, the federal definition in 27 C.F.R. § 478.11 looks to the law of the jurisdiction where the proceedings occurred to determine whether a person was convicted. A typical Massachusetts CWOF therefore does not itself create a § 922(g)(9) conviction bar.
A current 209A or 258E order is independently disqualifying under § 121F while it remains in effect. A qualifying order may also trigger § 922(g)(8), but only when the federal requirements are met, including actual notice and an opportunity to participate, a protected intimate partner or child, qualifying restraining terms, and either the required credible-threat finding or the specified force prohibition. Section 3B and Section 3C separately govern court-ordered license suspension and firearm surrender. Neither makes surrender an automatic consequence of criminal arraignment alone. The firm’s Massachusetts firearms page addresses licensing and possession in more detail.
CORI, the Domestic-Violence Record, Sealing, and Expungement
Police involvement may create incident, arrest, booking, or fingerprint records. Massachusetts CORI ordinarily begins at arraignment. A separate process applies under G.L. c. 276, § 56A. If the Commonwealth alleges Chapter 209A abuse in connection with the charged crime, it files a preliminary written statement and the judge makes a preliminary written ruling. That statement enters the statewide domestic violence record keeping system, not CORI or the public court file.
Section 56A requires removal of that statement after a not-guilty finding, a no bill, or a finding of no probable cause. A dismissal is not eligible for removal under § 56A. The charge label does not control this issue. A § 56A statement can accompany a § 13A case when abuse is alleged. The firm’s domestic-violence records page distinguishes the police file, CORI, § 56A records, and the civil restraining-order registry.
G.L. c. 265, § 13N creates a separate record consequence after certain misdemeanor convictions. If the misdemeanor has as an element the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, the court must determine whether the victim or intended victim was a family or household member under Chapter 209A. When the court finds that relationship, it must enter the offense and relationship in the records and forward the entry to DCJIS for the criminal justice information system and for federally permitted or required NICS reporting.
Section 13N uses Chapter 209A’s broader relationship definition, not the narrower definition in § 13M(c). A reduction to § 13A therefore does not by itself prevent a domestic-relationship record finding. Application still depends on the elements of the misdemeanor for which the conviction entered. Describing the incident as domestic is not enough.
Ordinary § 13A(a) and first-offense § 13M(a) are misdemeanors. A qualifying record may become eligible for ordinary sealing after the three-year period and the other conditions in G.L. c. 276, § 100A. Section 13M is excluded from ordinary time-based expungement by § 100J, although § 100K preserves narrow cause-based expungement grounds for records produced by specified errors, identity misuse, or fraud. Sealing CORI does not erase every other record.
Can the Case Continue if the Complaining Witness Does Not Testify?
Yes, if the Commonwealth has other admissible evidence sufficient to prove every element. A 911 recording, body camera video, medical evidence, photographs, or another witness each presents a separate evidentiary question. An excited utterance must satisfy Massachusetts Guide to Evidence § 803(2). The judge must also conduct the statement-by-statement Confrontation Clause analysis. A married complaining witness may refuse to testify under G.L. c. 233, § 20. The same rules apply under § 13A and § 13M. The § 13M page, the excited utterance and recantation page, and the spousal privilege FAQ explain each rule.
Defenses to Sections 13A and 13M
The Conduct Does Not Meet the Charged Theory
Under the current Superior Court model, an attempted-battery assault can fail if the evidence does not establish attempted physical force, specific intent to cause bodily harm, or reasonable proximity. A threatened-battery assault can fail without an objectively menacing act, intent to cause fear of immediate bodily harm, and resulting fear or recognition of risk. The District Court formulation differs as explained above. An accident, ambiguous movement, remote threat, or unintended contact may fail for different reasons depending on the theory charged.
The Section 13M Relationship Is Not Proved
The Commonwealth must prove one of the relationships listed in § 13M(c). Shared residence, a blood relationship, an in-law relationship, or social acquaintance alone does not establish that element. When the alleged relationship is dating or engagement, its substance and duration are factual questions governed by the statutory factors.
Self-Defense
Self-defense applies the same way under § 13A and § 13M. Once the evidence fairly raises it, the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense. When the identity of the first aggressor is disputed, the judge may admit specific violent acts by the complainant under Commonwealth v. Adjutant, and the Commonwealth may then rebut with the defendant’s own violent acts. The firm’s Massachusetts self-defense page explains the elements and the notice rules.
Preparing a Defense
A useful review begins with the exact complaint language and the prosecution’s theory. Counsel should identify the alleged assault or battery branch, test the § 13M relationship evidence, preserve recordings and messages, examine every out-of-court statement separately, and account for related release, 209A, firearms, immigration, licensing, and record issues before recommending a disposition.
Serpa Law Office represents people charged with assault, assault and battery, and assault or assault and battery on a family or household member in the Massachusetts District Court, Boston Municipal Court, and Superior Court. Call 617-936-0201 or use the contact form to request a confidential consultation.
A person who has been falsely accused should read the firm’s page on defending a false accusation of domestic violence in Massachusetts, which explains how counsel proves bias and motive.
Related Serpa Law Office Resources
We Accept the Following Payment Solutions
