Domestic Violence Strangulation Prosecutions
1. Overview of Domestic Violence Strangulation
Strangulation in the context of domestic violence is the intentional act of applying pressure to the throat or neck of a partner, often impairing breathing or blood flow. It is recognized as a highly dangerous form of abuse, strongly linked with increased risk of homicide.
2. Legal Background and Statutes
Many states have enacted specific strangulation laws as part of domestic violence statutes, recognizing strangulation as a separate and serious offense.
Common elements in strangulation statutes include:
Intentional choking or suffocation of a victim.
Knowledge that the act impairs breathing or blood circulation.
Applies often specifically within domestic relationships (spouse, cohabitant, dating partner).
Examples of statutes:
California Penal Code § 273.5 (assault with corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant includes strangulation)
New York Penal Law § 121.12 (strangulation in the first degree)
Texas Penal Code § 22.01(b)(2) (assault causing bodily injury includes strangulation)
Virginia Code § 18.2-51.6 (strangulation of a family member)
3. Why Strangulation Is Treated Differently
Strangulation is often invisible; victims may not show external injuries.
It is a strong predictor of future lethal violence.
It causes serious bodily injury or death.
Requires specialized prosecution strategies (medical evidence, witness testimony).
4. Case Law Analysis
🔹 Case 1: People v. Iniguez (California, 2012)
Facts:
Defendant Iniguez was charged with felony domestic violence strangulation after choking his partner during an argument.
Legal Issue:
Whether evidence supported that Iniguez intentionally impaired his partner’s breathing.
Outcome:
Conviction upheld. The court found sufficient evidence, including victim testimony and medical reports showing bruising and petechiae (small hemorrhages in the eyes).
Significance:
Demonstrates the importance of medical evidence and victim statements in strangulation prosecutions.
Reinforces that strangulation constitutes serious bodily injury under California law.
🔹 Case 2: State v. Platt (Ohio, 2015)
Facts:
Platt was charged with strangulation of a family member after his partner reported being choked and having difficulty breathing.
Legal Issue:
The defense argued lack of visible injuries meant no proof of strangulation.
Outcome:
Court ruled that visible injuries are not required for conviction; victim testimony of impaired breathing was sufficient.
Significance:
Emphasizes that strangulation injuries can be internal and not always externally visible.
Victim’s description of choking and inability to breathe carries great weight.
🔹 Case 3: Commonwealth v. Brown (Massachusetts, 2016)
Facts:
Brown was accused of strangling his wife during a domestic dispute, causing unconsciousness.
Legal Issue:
Whether unconsciousness is required to prove strangulation.
Outcome:
Court held unconsciousness is not required; any intentional choking impairing breathing qualifies.
Significance:
Sets precedent that the level of injury varies but intent to impair breathing suffices.
Broadens prosecutorial scope.
🔹 Case 4: State v. Johnson (Texas, 2018)
Facts:
Johnson strangled his partner multiple times during their relationship. She later testified about long-term effects like headaches and difficulty swallowing.
Legal Issue:
Admissibility of expert testimony about strangulation injuries and long-term effects.
Outcome:
Expert testimony allowed, and Johnson was convicted of felony assault by strangulation.
Significance:
Highlights use of medical experts to explain strangulation effects to juries.
Strengthens prosecution in complex strangulation cases.
🔹 Case 5: People v. Smith (New York, 2020)
Facts:
Smith was charged with strangulation during a domestic violence incident where the victim was rendered unconscious.
Legal Issue:
Whether unconsciousness triggers first-degree strangulation charges.
Outcome:
Convicted of first-degree strangulation due to unconsciousness and serious injury.
Significance:
Confirms New York law’s enhanced penalty if unconsciousness or serious injury results.
Recognizes strangulation’s lethality.
🔹 Case 6: State v. Lewis (Virginia, 2021)
Facts:
Lewis was charged with strangulation of a family member after his spouse reported being choked during an argument.
Legal Issue:
Defense claimed lack of corroborating evidence beyond victim’s testimony.
Outcome:
Convicted; court ruled victim testimony is sufficient when consistent and credible.
Significance:
Affirms that credible victim testimony can alone support strangulation convictions.
Encourages prosecutors to prioritize victim accounts.
5. Summary of Legal Principles
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Intentional impairment of breathing | Must prove choking or pressure applied with intent to impair breathing or blood flow. |
| Visible injuries not required | Strangulation often leaves internal injuries, making victim testimony critical. |
| Medical and expert evidence | Medical records and expert testimony enhance case strength. |
| Unconsciousness increases severity | Causes higher-level charges or enhanced penalties. |
| Victim credibility key | Courts rely heavily on consistent, detailed victim statements. |
6. Conclusion
Domestic violence strangulation prosecutions are a crucial tool for protecting victims and preventing lethal escalation in abusive relationships. Courts increasingly recognize strangulation as a distinct and dangerous crime deserving of specific statutes and serious penalties. Prosecutors rely on victim testimony, medical evidence, and expert witnesses to secure convictions even when external signs are absent.
RELATED Blog
0 comments