Now Accepting New Clients!

Understanding the Difference Between Assault and Battery

Original Post: 11/15/2017

A man aggressively holds another, assulting him, while the victim tries to defuse the situation. For some, assault and battery are two terms that are commonly mixed up or used interchangeably while conversing.

Even though both assault and battery are crimes, they differ in nature and attract different sentences. Regardless of being different crimes, assault and battery have severe penalties, especially if the people charged are prosecuted and convicted as per the fullest extent of the law.

In this article, we break down the differences between the assault and battery so you can more clearly understand both. 

Differences Between Battery and Assault

The major difference between an assault charge and battery charge is the threat of harm and the actual presence of harm.

One is charged with battery if they have caused real physical harm to someone else. An assault charge is when one has caused a threat of harm.

Since the charges are quite different, they attract different penalties if there is a conviction. If someone is facing either of the charges, they could be subjected to fines or a jail term.

Qualities of Assault

  • Justification is self-defense or defense
  • The purpose is to threaten
  • Not always physical

Qualities of Battery

  • Justification is either necessity, self-defense, or defense
  • Physical contact
  • Causes harm

Defense to Battery and Assault

The most common defense approach for assault or battery is mutual consent, even though the definitions of these two crimes can vary depending on the state someone is in. Through mutual consent, both parties will own up to the situation meaning that there will not be a one-sided approach in the case.

Other common defenses to battery and assault charges include defense of property, defense of others, or self-defense. It’s important to note that you can only use these defense approaches if the amount of force you used to defend yourself or others was proportionate to the battery or assault you intended to stop. 

Get Experienced Legal Advice for Your Assault or Battery Charge

Even though the consequences of a potential conviction are frightening, an experienced and knowledgeable attorney from Aldrich Legal Services will provide you with a great defense team. In many cases, experienced legal representation can help you avoid conviction or lower your damages. 

If you or someone you know need a reliable criminal defense attorney, enlist the help of an experienced criminal defense attorney at Aldrich Legal Services. Our team of lawyers are familiar with the local system and can give you the help you deserve. 

REAL ESTATE 65: Determining that it could not conclude the trial court erred in its factual findings, and that it did not err in reforming a 2005 deed, the court affirmed the ruling that defendants were fee simple owners of the disputed 50-foot area

This case arose from a real-property dispute between brothers, as well as their respective wives. After a bench trial, the trial court rendered its findings of fact. The trial court determined that plaintiffs did not prove that excluding the...

FAMILY LAW 58: The trial court did not err by denying defendant-father’s motion to change custody and modify his parenting time of the parties’ child without having an evidentiary hearing to determine if there was proper cause or a change in circums

This case arose from a custody and parenting-time dispute between plaintiff-mother and father over their minor child. After father failed to respond to the paternity complaint within the 21 days of receipt of the complaint, mother filed an affidavit...

DIVORCE 53: Although the court affirmed the trial court’s decisions to deny defendant’s motions to set aside the default and the default JOD, it vacated the portions of the default JOD as to the distribution of marital property, custody, parenting t

Plaintiff filed for divorce. Defendant filed an answer and a counterclaim for divorce.  Plaintiff and defendant were both ordered to appear at the settlement conference. After defendant failed to appear, the trial court entered a default. Soon...

FAMILY LAW 53: The trial court erred by treating the parties’ GAL as an LGAL and denying the parties the right to question her at a hearing; however, the trial court did not err in requiring the parties to compensate the GAL for her services.

Plaintiff and Defendant were never married, but share a young son who was born in 2016. The parties have battled over custody, child support, and other parenting issues ever since. In the spring of 2019, the parties filed competing motions to modify...

The Difference Between Theft, Robbery, and Burglary

Original Post: 1/11/2019 Often, burglary, robbery, and theft are used interchangeably even though there are distinct differences between all of them. Though, what all three do have in common is they may involve the unlawful taking of...

REAL ESTATE 59: Concluding that the one-year period contained in the parties’ home purchase agreement was not a statute of limitations, but rather akin to a statute of repose, and that it was plain and unambiguous, the court held that it barred plai

BACKGROUND On March 12, 2016, the parties entered into an agreement for the purchase of defendants’ home. The purchase agreement contained the following clause: TIME FOR LEGAL ACTION: Buyer and Seller agree that any legal action against...

CRIMINAL LAW 16: The trial court did not err in refusing to order a Daubert hearing as to the reliability of the DataMaster breathalyzer device as MCL 257.625a(6)(a) shows the Legislature has determined that the device’s results are valid and reliabl

UNDERLYING FACTS In the early afternoon of November 4, 2016, defendant was pulled over after an officer was dispatched for a possible drunk driver. The officer had defendant exit his vehicle and perform several field sobriety tests. Those tests...

FAMILY LAW 52: Defendant-mother was not entitled to relief on her claim the trial court did not comply with the requirements for a de novo hear, the trial court did not err in using the preponderance of the evidence standard, and its best interest f

PERTINENT FACTS In July 2017, plaintiff and defendant divorced by consent judgment. Under the judgment of divorce, the parties shared joint legal and physical custody of their three minor children. On September 24, 2018, plaintiff filed a motion...

Are you required to provide ID as a passenger?

Original Post: 05/14/2017 The preceding is for informational purposes only. Being stopped by the police is not usually a pleasant experience. Even with the most benign of infractions, the encounter can be adversarial. The idea of...

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000