If the car bumping the officer (i.e., the physical contact) was truly unintentional — meaning the driver did not willfully or intentionally cause the contact, and it was an accident
due to panic, misjudgment, or other non-deliberate factors — this could significantly affect the charges under federal law, particularly 18 U.S.C. § 111.
Key Elements of 18 U.S.C. § 111
This statute criminalizes anyone who forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with a federal officer engaged in official duties. Courts treat it as a general intent crime, meaning the government must prove the act was done voluntarily and intentionally, but not necessarily with the specific intent to injure the officer or even to commit an "assault" in the traditional sense.
- Driving away from the stopped position after being ordered to exit would likely still qualify as resisting, opposing, or impeding the officers (a core violation under § 111(a)), as this is a deliberate choice to disobey and flee rather than comply.
- The penalties escalate based on severity:
- Simple assault (no physical contact): misdemeanor, up to 1 year in prison.
- With physical contact (or intent to commit another felony): felony, up to 8 years.
- With a deadly/dangerous weapon (a vehicle can qualify when used to cause contact) or bodily injury: up to 20 years.
Impact of Unintentional Contact
- If the bumping was genuinely accidental (e.g., the driver panicked, foot slipped off the brake, or they misjudged while accelerating away), the government would have a harder time proving the forcible nature of the assault or that the contact itself was intentional.
- Many courts define "forcible assault" as requiring an intentional striking, attempt to inflict injury, or threat that causes reasonable fear of harm. Purely accidental contact may not meet this threshold for the enhanced "physical contact" prong.
- Defenses often focus on lack of intent — arguing the driver did not voluntarily or willfully cause the contact — which could reduce the charge to simple assault/resistance (misdemeanor level) or even lead to acquittal on the assault aspect if the contact is deemed non-forcible.
- However, prosecutors frequently still charge the full range of § 111 violations in these scenarios, arguing that the overall act of fleeing was intentional and forcible, and that any resulting contact (even if unintended) elevates the offense. The vehicle itself can be viewed as a dangerous instrument in the context of evading officers.
Other Potential Charges
- Resisting or impeding without the contact element would likely remain prosecutable as a misdemeanor under § 111.
- State-level charges (e.g., reckless driving, assault by auto, or evading arrest) could still apply, depending on jurisdiction, and might not require the same level of intent for the contact.
- If evidence shows the driver was aware of the risk (e.g., officer was clearly in the path and the driver accelerated anyway), prosecutors could argue recklessness or implied intent, strengthening the case for felony enhancements.
In summary, a truly unintentional bump would be a strong defense to the higher-penalty prongs (physical contact or deadly weapon), potentially keeping the case at the misdemeanor level or focusing only on the resisting/fleeing aspect. Outcomes depend heavily on the specific facts, video evidence, witness statements, and how prosecutors interpret intent. Federal cases like this are often aggressively pursued to protect officers, so consulting an experienced federal criminal defense attorney would be essential in any real situation.
