Massachusetts Disorderly Conduct and Resisting Arrest FAQs

Disorderly conduct under M.G.L. c. 272, § 53 covers fighting, threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or creating a hazardous or physically offensive condition for no legitimate purpose. The Commonwealth must also prove the conduct was reasonably likely to affect the public and that you intended to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or recklessly created that risk. Details are on our disorderly conduct and resisting arrest page.

No. Disorderly conduct is a misdemeanor. A first offense is punishable only by a fine of up to $150 with no possibility of jail. A second or subsequent offense carries up to six months in a house of correction, a fine of up to $200, or both.

Almost never. Speech alone cannot support the charge unless it amounts to fighting words likely to provoke immediate violence, and yelling at a police officer is protected by the First Amendment. The Appeals Court has held that shouting and waving your arms during a police encounter is not tumultuous behavior.

Under M.G.L. c. 268, § 32B, resisting arrest means knowingly preventing or attempting to prevent a police officer acting under color of official authority from making an arrest, either by using or threatening physical force or by any means that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to the officer or another person. It is a misdemeanor punishable by up to two and one half years in a house of correction.

No. The Supreme Judicial Court held in Commonwealth v. Montoya that flight alone is not resisting arrest. Running only becomes resisting if the manner of flight itself creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to an officer.

No. Massachusetts law does not recognize a right to resist an unlawful arrest, and the statute says an unlawful arrest is not a defense. The lawfulness of the arrest is challenged later through suppression motions and at trial. The exception involves excessive force, where you keep the right to defend yourself against unreasonable force under Commonwealth v. Moreira.

Excessive force changes the case. Under Commonwealth v. Moreira, when the evidence shows the officer used unreasonable or excessive force, self-defense is in play and the Commonwealth must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Body camera footage is often decisive on this issue.

The charge creates a CORI entry at arraignment, before anything is proven. That is why the defense goal is to end the case before arraignment ever happens, either at a clerk-magistrate hearing or through a pre-arraignment dismissal. A case resolved before arraignment creates no CORI entry at all.

Often yes. When police apply for a criminal complaint instead of making an arrest, you receive a show cause notice and a private clerk-magistrate hearing is held before any charge issues. A denied application means no complaint, no arraignment, and no criminal record. These hearings are extremely winnable with preparation and counsel.

The criminal case and the school disciplinary process are separate proceedings, and a campus incident can trigger both. The university applies its own standard of proof on its own schedule. Our student defense page explains how the two tracks are coordinated. Section 53 also protects enrolled students from delinquency adjudications for conduct within school settings.

Yes, in most circumstances. Dismissed charges can generally be sealed, and misdemeanor convictions become eligible for sealing after the statutory waiting period. Our page on sealing and expunging a Massachusetts record covers the process.

Attorney Serpa has defended disorderly conduct and resisting arrest cases across Massachusetts for three decades, with recent complaint applications denied outright at clerk-magistrate hearings and cases dismissed before arraignment. See our recent results, and call 617.936.0201 for a confidential consultation.