Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon in Massachusetts Domestic Violence Cases (M.G.L. c. 265, § 15A)

Updated August 2026

Massachusetts assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon, commonly called ABDW, is a felony under G.L. c. 265, § 15A. In a domestic violence case, prosecutors may charge it when they allege that a firearm, knife, vehicle, bottle, shoe, household object, or other item was used to make physical contact.

The dangerous-weapon allegation does not replace the domestic relationship allegation. When the complainant is a family or household member, the same incident may also produce a charge under G.L. c. 265, § 13M, a 209A proceeding, and firearm or licensing consequences.

ABDW can be prosecuted under an intentional or reckless theory. A related felony, assault by means of a dangerous weapon, or ADW, does not require physical contact. The distinction between the two charges often determines which elements and defenses control.

Assault by Means of a Dangerous Weapon in a Domestic Violence Case

G.L. c. 265, § 15B(b) makes assault by means of a dangerous weapon a felony. The offense is punishable by up to five years in state prison, up to two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction, or a fine of up to $1,000.

ADW does not require a completed touching. Massachusetts recognizes two ways to prove the underlying assault: an attempted battery and an immediately threatened battery. Both require intentional conduct and proof that the assault was committed by means of a dangerous weapon.

Under the attempted-battery theory, the Commonwealth must prove that the defendant specifically intended to commit a battery, took an overt step toward doing so, came reasonably close to completing the battery, and made the attempt with a dangerous weapon. The complainant does not have to see the attempt or experience fear.

Under the immediately-threatened-battery theory, the Commonwealth must prove that the defendant intended to place the complainant in fear of an immediate battery. The defendant must also have engaged in conduct the complainant reasonably perceived as an immediate threat and made the threat with a dangerous weapon.

Words, distance, movement, the object’s appearance, and the surrounding circumstances can determine whether the alleged threat was immediate and reasonably perceived.

Pointing what appears to be a firearm, raising a knife while close enough to strike, or driving a vehicle toward someone may support an ADW allegation even if no contact occurs. These examples do not establish guilt by themselves. The Commonwealth must prove the applicable assault theory and the dangerous-weapon element beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15B(a) applies when the complainant is sixty or older. A first offense carries the same maximum terms, while a second or subsequent qualifying offense carries additional sentencing restrictions. Age, prior-conviction, and notice issues require separate review.

The Difference Between ADW and ABDW

The central difference is physical contact. ADW under § 15B requires an attempted or immediately threatened battery with a dangerous weapon, but it does not require the weapon to touch the complainant. ABDW under § 15A requires an actual touching by means of a dangerous weapon.

The required state of mind also differs. ADW is an intentional assault. ABDW may rest on an intentional touching or on reckless conduct that causes bodily injury. The Commonwealth cannot turn an accidental, noninjurious contact into reckless ABDW without proving the required conduct, risk, and injury.

The basic maximum penalties differ as well. ADW is punishable by up to five years in state prison, while basic ABDW carries up to ten years. Aggravated ABDW under § 15A(c) carries up to fifteen years. The charge listed on a complaint does not decide which offense the admissible evidence can prove.

In a domestic incident, either dangerous-weapon offense may accompany a § 13M charge, a protective-order allegation, or a dangerousness motion. The defense should identify whether the prosecution claims an attempt, a threat, an intentional touching, or a reckless injury instead of treating ADW and ABDW as interchangeable labels.

The Penalties Under G.L. c. 265, § 15A

Under G.L. c. 265, § 15A(b), ABDW is punishable by up to ten years in state prison, up to two and one-half years in a house of correction, a fine of up to $5,000, or both a fine and imprisonment.

The offense is a felony because the statute authorizes a state-prison sentence. A case may remain in the District Court, where the court can impose only the available house-of-correction sentence, or proceed by indictment in the Superior Court.

Section 15A(c) raises the maximum state-prison sentence to fifteen years and the maximum fine to $10,000 in four circumstances. The Commonwealth must prove the aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt.

• The alleged battery caused serious bodily injury.
• The complainant was pregnant, and the defendant knew or had reason to know of the pregnancy.
• A qualifying restraining, vacate, or no-contact order protecting the complainant was in effect, and the defendant knew about it.
• The defendant was at least eighteen and the complainant was under fourteen.

Serious bodily injury is specifically defined. It requires permanent disfigurement, loss or impairment of a bodily function, limb, or organ, or a substantial risk of death. A painful injury, bruising, or medical treatment does not automatically satisfy that definition.

Intentional ABDW

The Massachusetts Superior Court model jury instruction identifies four elements for intentional ABDW. The Commonwealth must prove that the defendant touched the complainant, did so by means of a dangerous weapon, intended the touching, and acted without legal justification.

The touching may be direct or indirect. Striking someone with an object is direct. Causing the person to come into contact with an object or surface can be indirect. The prosecution must still establish that the battery occurred by means of the alleged weapon.

Intentional ABDW does not require proof of a serious injury. A slight touching can satisfy the battery element if the Commonwealth proves the remaining elements. Injury becomes a separate required element when the prosecution charges the serious-bodily-injury form under § 15A(c)(i).

Reckless ABDW

Reckless ABDW has a different structure. The Commonwealth must prove intentional conduct involving a dangerous weapon, that the conduct was reckless, and that it caused bodily injury.

Recklessness requires more than ordinary negligence. The conduct must create a high degree of likelihood that substantial harm will result, and the defendant must know or reasonably should know of that risk.

The distinction matters when contact was unintended. An accidental touching is not intentional ABDW. The prosecution may nevertheless argue reckless ABDW if the defendant deliberately engaged in dangerous conduct and that conduct caused an injury.

The complaint, police report, and proposed jury instruction should be reviewed to determine which theory the Commonwealth is pursuing. A defense that addresses intent but ignores recklessness may leave a separate theory unanswered.

What Qualifies as a Dangerous Weapon

Some objects are dangerous by their nature because they are designed to cause death or serious injury. Firearms and certain knives can fall within this category.

An ordinary object may become dangerous because of the manner in which it was used. A bottle, vehicle, household item, piece of furniture, or shod foot may qualify when the evidence shows use capable of causing serious bodily injury.

The name of the object does not decide the issue. The factfinder examines its size, weight, condition, movement, point of contact, force, surrounding circumstances, and the way the prosecution claims it was used.

When dangerousness depends on use, it is ordinarily a factual question for the jury. If the Commonwealth fails to prove the weapon element but proves the elements of simple assault and battery, the jury may be instructed on that lesser included offense.

Domestic Violence Designation and Related Charges

Section 15A does not require a family or household relationship. The domestic designation comes from the alleged relationship and from any companion charge or order.

An alleged battery against a spouse, former spouse, co-parent, relative by blood or marriage, household member, or person in a substantive dating relationship may also be charged under § 13M. An active 209A order can support a separate violation charge if the alleged conduct violated an enforceable term.

The prosecution must prove the elements of each count. The presence of a § 13M charge does not establish the dangerous-weapon element, and the presence of an object does not establish the qualifying relationship.

The firm’s Boston domestic violence defense guide explains the related criminal and civil proceedings.

The Six-Hour Bail Rule and Dangerousness Hearing

When an adult is arrested for conduct that would constitute abuse under Chapter 209A, G.L. c. 276, § 42A provides that the person ordinarily may not be admitted to bail sooner than six hours after arrest. A judge in open court may order an earlier release.

The Commonwealth may also request a dangerousness hearing under G.L. c. 276, § 58A. ABDW is a qualifying felony, and an allegation involving domestic abuse supplies an additional statutory basis for the motion.

A dangerousness motion does not establish guilt or require detention. The judge must decide whether release conditions will reasonably assure the safety of another person or the community. Pretrial detention requires clear and convincing evidence that no conditions will do so.

Self-Defense and Defense of Another

A defendant may use reasonable force to protect against an imminent use of unlawful force. Once the evidence raises self-defense, the Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no self-defense.

The use of an object does not eliminate self-defense. The issue is whether the defendant reasonably believed force was necessary and whether the amount of force was proportionate to the danger as the defendant reasonably perceived it.

If the alleged use of the object constituted deadly force, additional requirements apply, including a reasonable belief of imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury and the duty to use a reasonable means of escape when the law requires it.

Evidence of the complainant’s prior violence may be relevant in two different ways. Conduct known to the defendant may explain the defendant’s reasonable concern for safety. Under Commonwealth v. Adjutant, specific acts initiated by the complainant may also be admissible when self-defense is raised and the identity of the first aggressor is disputed.

The defense must provide the notice required by Mass. R. Crim. P. 14 when relying on Adjutant evidence. The current Massachusetts Guide to Evidence, Section 404, explains the limits and the prosecution’s opportunity to offer rebuttal evidence.

The firm’s guide to self-defense in Massachusetts addresses nondeadly force, deadly force, retreat, defense of another, and prior-act evidence.

Other Defenses to an ABDW Charge

The object was not dangerous as used. An ordinary object is not a dangerous weapon merely because it was present. The defense can contest the alleged manner of use, capability to cause serious injury, and physical evidence.

The contact did not occur by means of the object. An object displayed during an argument may support another allegation, but ABDW requires a battery by means of the weapon.

The evidence does not prove intent or recklessness. Video, witness accounts, the movement of both parties, and the location of objects may support accident or show that the prosecution’s theory does not match the physical evidence.

The serious-bodily-injury element is absent. Medical records must be compared with the statutory definition. Treatment, pain, or a temporary injury does not necessarily establish permanent impairment or a substantial risk of death.

The identification or account is unreliable. Complete messages, 911 recordings, body-camera video, surveillance footage, photographs, and prior statements may expose material inconsistencies.

911 Calls, Medical Statements, and an Unavailable Witness

A complainant’s later decision not to testify does not automatically end the prosecution. The Commonwealth may seek to admit a 911 call, statements to police or emergency personnel, medical records, photographs, and testimony from other witnesses.

Each statement requires its own analysis. An excited utterance must satisfy the requirements of Massachusetts Guide to Evidence § 803(2). A statement offered for medical diagnosis or treatment is governed by § 803(4). A medical record requires a separate records foundation.

The Confrontation Clause presents an additional question in a criminal trial. A testimonial statement generally requires prior cross-examination if the declarant does not appear, while a nontestimonial statement may be admitted if an evidence rule permits it.

The firm’s pages on excited utterances and an unavailable accuser and recantation in a domestic violence case explain those issues.

No-Contact Orders and Witness Intimidation

Every no-contact and stay-away order must be obeyed unless a judge changes it. The complainant’s invitation or consent does not authorize a violation.

A defendant should not ask the complainant to withdraw a report, change testimony, avoid court, or withhold evidence. Conduct intended to influence or prevent testimony may lead to a separate witness intimidation charge.

Forfeiture by wrongdoing requires proof that the defendant engaged in wrongful conduct intended to cause the witness’s unavailability. Ordinary nonappearance does not establish forfeiture, and not every contact constitutes intimidation. The facts and intent must be proved.

Criminal Records, Firearms, Immigration, and Professional Licensing

A criminal complaint creates a CORI entry at arraignment. A dismissal or acquittal may be eligible for sealing without the seven-year conviction waiting period. A felony conviction ordinarily requires satisfaction of the statutory seven-year period and the other requirements of G.L. c. 276, § 100A.

A conviction also creates serious firearm consequences under state and federal law. A CWOF or other nonconviction disposition requires separate analysis and may still qualify as a conviction for a federal purpose. The exact result depends on the disposition, offense elements, relationship, and restoration rules.

The firm’s article on firearms after a domestic violence charge explains the different state and federal categories.

Immigration analysis must occur before any plea or admission. Whether a disposition is treated as a crime of violence or aggravated felony can depend on the statutory theory, record of conviction, and sentence. A Massachusetts CWOF may still be a conviction under federal immigration law.

Reporting and disciplinary rules for licensed professionals and students vary by profession and institution. The guides to domestic violence and immigration and domestic violence defense for professionals, students, and noncitizens address those consequences.

Frequently Asked Questions About ADW and ABDW

How Attorney Serpa Defends a Domestic Violence ABDW Charge

The review begins with the criminal complaint, police reports, 911 recordings, body-camera video, photographs, medical records, protective-order file, witness statements, and any available digital evidence. The alleged object and the theory of use are examined separately from the underlying touching.

Attorney Serpa determines whether the Commonwealth is pursuing intentional or reckless ABDW, whether an aggravated category applies, and whether the evidence raises self-defense. Any hearsay, medical-record, or Confrontation Clause issue is identified before trial.

Serpa Law Office represents clients charged with ABDW and related domestic violence offenses in the Boston Municipal Court and Massachusetts District and Superior Courts. To discuss a pending charge, call 617.936.0201 or request a confidential consultation.

Related Serpa Law Office Resources

• Massachusetts ADW and ABDW Defense in Non-Domestic Cases
• Simple Assault and Assault and Battery in Domestic Violence Cases
• Strangulation or Suffocation
• Massachusetts Domestic Violence Enhancements
• CWOF, Pretrial Probation, and Diversion
• How Massachusetts Criminal Cases Are Dismissed
• Massachusetts Criminal Defense Results