Imprisonment And The Law: Civil Or Criminal?

False imprisonment is a complex legal issue that can result in both civil and criminal charges. It occurs when an individual intentionally restricts another person's freedom of movement without their consent or legal authority. This can be achieved through physical barriers, force, or other means that limit movement in all directions. False imprisonment is considered a tort, a wrongful civil act causing harm, and can also be a crime, resulting in severe penalties such as prison time, fines, or restitution. Those affected by false imprisonment may seek monetary compensation through civil or criminal suits, depending on the specifics of their case and the applicable laws in their jurisdiction.

False imprisonment is a tort

The tort of false imprisonment involves an unlawful restraint on freedom of movement or personal liberty. The two essential elements required to constitute false imprisonment are the unlawfulness of the detention or restraint, and the intention to confine the plaintiff without their consent or legal authority. The plaintiff must prove that the defendant is liable or legally responsible for false imprisonment by a legal standard of proof called "preponderance of the evidence". This means that the plaintiff wins if they prove it is even slightly more likely than not that the defendant falsely imprisoned them.

False imprisonment can also be a crime, and a criminal case is brought by the state against a defendant who is alleged to have committed the crime. In this case, the prosecutor must prove the defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt", a higher standard of proof than in a tort lawsuit. The grading of a false imprisonment charge depends on the circumstances and the presence of aggravating factors. For example, in Texas, false imprisonment falls under the statutory offense of "unlawful restraint" and is classified as a third-degree felony, carrying a sentence of two to ten years in prison and a maximum fine of $10,000.

There are several defenses available to a defendant facing false imprisonment charges, such as proving consent or statutory affirmative defenses like the shopkeeper's privilege defense. In the case of false imprisonment by a peace officer, the police must have probable cause or reasonable suspicion, which are legal standards that allow them to suspect wrongdoing or a crime has been committed.

False imprisonment is a crime

In the United States, false imprisonment is considered a criminal offense under both federal and state laws. For example, under the Texas Penal Code, false imprisonment falls under the statutory offense of "unlawful restraint," which carries significant penalties, including fines and prison sentences. The grading of the charge and the severity of the punishment depend on the specific circumstances and the presence of aggravating factors.

False imprisonment is also recognized as a crime under Georgia law, where it is considered a crime of violence. This classification stems from the potential risk of physical injury associated with false imprisonment, as outlined in United States v. McMiller, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 8093 (3rd Cir. Pa. Apr. 19, 2010). The court's decision in this case highlights the serious nature of false imprisonment and the potential harm it can inflict on victims.

Additionally, false imprisonment can lead to long-term consequences beyond the immediate legal penalties. Individuals convicted of false imprisonment may face social stigma due to their criminal record, which can create challenges in obtaining housing, employment, and other opportunities. The impact of a false imprisonment conviction can extend far beyond the duration of any sentence imposed, affecting various aspects of an individual's life.

Defences against false imprisonment

False imprisonment is the act of restraining a person against their will in a bounded area without any justification. It is an act punishable under criminal law as well as under tort law.

• Lawful authority: The defendant may claim they had a legal justification for the confinement, such as a valid arrest warrant, the defence of others, or citizen's arrest.
• Mistake of fact: The defendant may argue that they had a reasonable but mistaken belief that their actions were lawful or necessary.
• Insufficient evidence: The defendant may challenge the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the prosecution to prove the elements of false imprisonment. This could include challenging the testimony of the victim and witnesses, physical evidence, surveillance footage, or documentation.
• Probable cause: The existence of probable cause is an absolute bar to claims of false imprisonment. Probable cause refers to a reasonable suspicion that the person is guilty of an offence, which can justify an arrest without a warrant.
• Waiver of the right to complain: When a party is under arrest, any agreement or arrangement waiving any further proceedings, release, or claim for damages can be a defence for false imprisonment.
• Restraint of minors or persons of unsound mind: The restraint or detention of minors or persons of unsound mind by their parents or legal guardians is not considered false imprisonment, as it is usually performed for the well-being of the individual.

False imprisonment and unlawful restraint

False imprisonment occurs when a person intentionally restrains another without their consent or legal authority. This includes restricting their movement or confining them to a restricted area. False imprisonment can be prosecuted under criminal law and can also result in a civil (tort) lawsuit.

Under tort law, false imprisonment is classified as an intentional tort, where the defendant willfully acts to confine the plaintiff without their consent and without the authority of the law. An act of restraint can be physical, such as a locked door or the use of force, or it can be a failure to release or the invalid use of legal authority. The plaintiff must prove that the defendant is liable and legally responsible for their false imprisonment.

In the United States, false imprisonment is considered a crime of violence and can result in severe penalties, including prison time, fines, or restitution. The specific consequences depend on the circumstances and the presence of aggravating factors, such as the use of force or intimidation.

Unlawful restraint, which falls under false imprisonment, can be a felony offense. If the defendant recklessly exposes the victim to a substantial risk of severe injury or knowingly restrains a public servant, the offense may be considered a third-degree felony. If the defendant knowingly restrains a peace officer or judge during the discharge of their duties, it becomes a second-degree felony, with potential prison time and fines.

It is important to note that there are defenses available for those charged with false imprisonment, such as proving consent or the presence of probable cause. An experienced attorney can help individuals facing these charges by investigating the case, identifying potential defenses, and contesting the prosecution's evidence.

The consequences of false imprisonment

False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint of a person's freedom of movement against their will by someone without legal authority or justification. It is considered a criminal offence as well as a civil wrong, and can be charged as a misdemeanour or a felony, depending on the circumstances.

Criminal Law

Under criminal law, false imprisonment is classified as unlawful imprisonment, with the specifics detailed in the penal code of each state. A person who falsely imprisons another may be charged with a third-degree felony offence, which carries a sentence of two to ten years in prison and a maximum fine of $10,000. If the defendant knowingly restrains a peace officer or judge during the discharge of their duties, the offence becomes a second-degree felony, with a sentence of two to twenty years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.

Civil Law

False imprisonment can be brought as an intentional tort law claim (civil wrongful act) in a private lawsuit. A conviction can carry severe penalties, but defendants may have defences available to contest the state's case and secure a dismissal, acquittal, or reduction in charges. An example of an affirmative defence is the shopkeeper's privilege, where a shopkeeper who reasonably believes that a plaintiff has stolen or is attempting to steal something may detain the plaintiff for a reasonable amount of time to investigate.

Long-term Consequences

A false imprisonment conviction may have long-term consequences, including the social stigma of a criminal record, which can make it difficult to obtain housing or employment.

Frequently asked questions