OIDV Project Of Michigan - Officer Involved Domestic Violence Project Of Michigan

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

11052014 - Protecting Pets From Domestic Violence with Protection Orders

Also see:

FBI Adds Animal Cruelty to Uniform Crime Report

http://abbiandbaileyfromtheheart.blogspot.com/2014/09/fbi-adds-animal-cruelty-to-uniform.html

Washington D.C. - RESCINDED

Domestic violence protection orders with protection for pets

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Georgia

Hawaii

Illinois

Iowa

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Minnesota

Nevada

New Jersey

New York

North Carolina

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

South Carolina

Tennessee

Texas

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Washington D.C. - Rescinded -

Puerto Rico

American Humane Association:

Expanding Protective Orders to Include Companion Animals

http://www.americanhumane.org/assets/pdfs/interaction/hab-link-ppo-companion-animals.pdf

Domestic Violence and Pets:

List of States that Include Pets in Protection Orders

https://www.animallaw.info/article/domestic-violence-and-pets-list-states-include-pets-protection-orders

Author: Rebecca F. Wisch

Place of Publication: Michigan State University College of Law

Publish Year: 2014

Primary Citation: Animal Legal & Historical Center

Summary:

This document lists the states that include pets in domestic violence protection orders with links to the actual statutes.

1. Arizona

AZ ST § 13-3602; A. R. S. § 13-3602

https://www.animallaw.info/article/domestic-violence-and-pets-list-states-include-pets-protection-orders

This Arizona law provides that, if a court issues an order of protection, the court may grant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody or control of any animal that is owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by the petitioner, the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of the petitioner or the respondent, and order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, committing an act of cruelty or neglect in violation of section 13- 2910 or otherwise disposing of the animal.

2. Arkansas

AR ST § 9-15-205 and 9-15-401 to 407 ; A.C.A. § 9-15-205 and 9-15-401 to 407

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ar-domestic-violence-chapter-15-domestic-abuse

Upon a finding of domestic abuse, a court may "[d]irect the care, custody, or control of any pet. owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party residing in the household" in an order for protection filed by a petitioner. Arkansas also defines emotional abuse to include harming a spouse's pet in its Spousal Safety Plan Act; emotional abuse, if committed by a spouse against hir or her spouse, also constitutes spousal abuse.

3. California

CA FAM § 6320 - 6327; West's Ann. Cal. Fam. Code § 6320 - 6327

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ca-domestic-violence-inclusion-animals-domestic-violence

On a showing of good cause, the court may include in a protective order a grant to the petitioner of the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent.

4. Colorado

CO ST § 18-6-800.3; C. R. S. A. § 18-6-800.3

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/co-domestic-violence-animals-and-domestic-violence-definition

"Domestic violence" also includes any other crime against a person, or against property, including an animal, or any municipal ordinance violation against a person, or against property, including an animal.

5. District of Columbia (D.C.)

DC ST § 16-1005; DC CODE § 16-1005

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/dc-domestic-violence-chapter-10-proceedings-regarding-intrafamily-offenses

This D.C. law provides that if, after a hearing, the judicial officer finds that there is good cause to believe the respondent has committed or threatened to commit a criminal offense against the petitioner or against petitioner's animal or an animal in petitioner's household, the judicial officer may issue a protection order that directs the care, custody, or control of a domestic animal that belongs to petitioner or respondent or lives in his or her household.

6. Connecticut

CT ST § 46b-15; C. G. S. A. § 46b-15

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ct-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-46b-15-relief-physical-abuse-family-or-household-member-or-person

Under this Connecticut law, any family or household member who has been subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by another family or household member or person in, or has recently been in, a dating relationship who has been subjected to a continuous threat of present physical pain or physical injury by the other person in such relationship may apply to the Superior Court for an order of protection. The court may also make orders for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.

7. Hawaii

HI ST § 586-4; H R S § 586-4

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/hi-domestic-violence-chapter-586-domestic-abuse-protective-orders

In Hawaii, the ex parte temporary restraining order may also enjoin or restrain both of the parties from taking, concealing, removing, threatening, physically abusing, or otherwise disposing of any animal identified to the court as belonging to a household, until further order of the court.

8. Illinois

IL ST CH 725 § 5/112A-14; 725 I.L.C.S. 5/112A-14

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/il-domestic-violence-article-112a-domestic-violence

This Illinois law allows a court to issue an order of protection if the court finds that petitioner has been abused by a family or household member. It also allows for the protection of animals in domestic violence situations. The court can "[g]rant the petitioner the exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent and order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming, or otherwise disposing of the animal."

9. Iowa

I.C.A. §§ 236.3, 236.4, 236.5

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ia-domestic-violence-chapter-236-domestic-abuse

Iowa now allows the court to grant petitioners exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets or companion animals in both temporary and permanent orders. The animals can belong to the petitioner, the abuser, or a minor child of the petitioner or the abuser. The court can also order the abuser to stay away from the animals and not take, hide, bother, attack, threaten, or otherwise get rid of the pet or companion animal.

10. Louisiana

LA R.S. 46:2135; LSA-R.S. 46:2135

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/la-domestic-violence-chapter-28-protection-family-violence-act

This Louisiana law allows a court to enter a temporary restraining order, without bond, as it deems necessary to protect from abuse the petitioner. Among the provisions is one that allows the court to grant ". . . to the petitioner the exclusive care, possession, or control of any pets belonging to or under the care of the petitioner or minor children residing in the residence or household of either party, and directing the defendant to refrain from harassing, interfering with, abusing or injuring any pet, without legal justification, known to be owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either party."

11. Maine

ME ST T. 19-A § 4007; 19-A M. R. S. A. § 4007

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/me-domestic-violence-title-19-domestic-relations

This Maine law concerning personal protection orders in cases of abuse was amended in March of 2006 to include companion animals in protection orders. The new language specifies that a court may enter an order directing the care, custody or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.

12. Maryland

MD FAMILY § 4-501, 504.1; MD Code, Family Law, § 4-501, 504.1

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/md-domestic-violence-subtitle-5-domestic-violence

This Maryland law amended in 2011 allows an interim protective order to award temporary possession of any pet (defined in § 4-501 as a domesticated animal except livestock) to the person eligible for relief or the respondent).

13. Massachusetts

M.G.L.A. 209A § 11, MA ST 209A § 11

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ma-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-11-possession-care-and-control-domesticated-animal-owned-persons

This Massachusetts law, effective October of 2012, allows the court to order the possession, care and control of any domesticated animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household to the plaintiff or petitioner in a no contact or restraining order. The court may order the defendant to refrain from abusing, threatening, taking, interfering with, transferring, encumbering, concealing, harming or otherwise disposing of such animal.

14. Minnesota

MN ST § 518B.01; M.S.A. § 518B.01

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/mn-domestic-violence-518b01-chapter-518b-domestic-abuse

This law reflects Minnesota's provision for restraining orders in cases of domestic abuse. An amendment in 2010 concerns the care and keeping of a companion animal owed by either petitioner or respondent, and has a provision to allow the court to prevent harm to such animal. As stated in the law, "The order may direct the care, possession, or control of a pet or companion animal owned, possessed, or kept by the petitioner or respondent or a child of the petitioner or respondent. It may also direct the respondent to refrain from physically abusing or injuring any pet or companion animal, without legal justification, known to be owned, possessed, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either party as an indirect means of intentionally threatening the safety of such person."

15. Nevada

NEV. REV. STAT. §33.018; NV ST §33.018

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/nv-domestic-violence-chapter-33-injunctions-orders-protection-against-domestic-violence

In Nevada, a knowing, purposeful or reckless course of conduct intended to harass the other such as in juring or killing an animal, is included in their definition of Domestic Violence. A victim can then get a Protection Order and e njoin the adverse party from physically injuring, threatening to injure or taking possession of any animal that is owned or kept by the applicant or minor child, either directly or through an agent.

16. New Hampshire

N.H. Rev. Stat. §§ 173-B:1, 173:B4, 173:B5

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/nh-domestic-violence-chapter-173-b-protection-persons-domestic-violence

New Hampshire now considers animal cruelty to be “abuse” under its protection of persons from domestic violence statute. The law now allows a judge to grant the petitioner of a protective order exclusive care, custody, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the victim, the abuser, or a minor child in the household; the law also allows a judge to order the abuser to stay away from the pet in both temporary and final domestic violence protective orders.

17. New Jersey

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/nj-domestic-violence-chapter-25-domestic-violence-0

On January 17, 2012, Governor Christie signed the Domestic Violence Pet Protection Law . The law authorizes courts to include pets in domestic violence restraining orders. The court is allowed to enter an order "prohibiting the defendant from having any contact with any animal owed, possessed, leased, kept or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household."

18. New York

NY FAM CT § 842; McKinney's Family Court Act § 842

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ny-domestic-violence-article-8-family-offenses-proceedings

This New York law pertains to the issuance of protection orders. In July of 2006, the amendment that allows companion animals owned by the petitioner of the order or a minor child residing in the household to be included in the order was signed into law. The law specifically allows a court to order the respondent to refrain from intentionally injuring or killing, without justification, any companion animal the respondent knows to be owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by the petitioner or a minor child residing in the household.

19. North Carolina

NC ST § 50B-3; N.C.G.S.A. § 50B-3

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/nc-domestic-violence-chapter-50b-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-50b-3-relief

This North Carolina law reflects the state's provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. A protective order may provide for possession of personal property of the parties, including the care, custody, and control of any animal owned, possessed, kept, or held as a pet by either party or minor child residing in the household. The court may also order a party to refrain from cruelly treating or abusing an animal owned, possessed, kept, or held as a pet by either party or minor child residing in the household.

20. Oklahoma

OK ST T. 22 § 60.2; 22 Okl. St. Ann. § 60.2

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ok-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-602-protective-order-petition-complaint-requirement-certain-stalking

This Oklahoma law reflects the state's provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. The person seeking a protective order may further request the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner, defendant or minor child residing in the residence of the petitioner or defendant. The court may order the defendant to make no contact with the animal and forbid the defendant from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, molesting, attacking, striking, threatening, harming, or otherwise disposing of the animal.

21. Oregon

O.R.S. § 107.718, OR ST § 107.718

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/or-domestic-violence-107718-court-order-when-petitioner-imminent-danger-abuse-allows-pets

Under this Oregon law, if requested by a petitioner who has been the victim of domestic abuse, the court may enter an order to protect a companion or therapy animal. This includes an order to "[p]revent the neglect and protect the safety of any service or therapy animal or any animal kept for personal protection or companionship, but not an animal kept for any business, commercial, agricultural or economic purpose."

22. Puerto Rico

PR ST T. 5 § 1678; 5 L.P.R.A. § 1678

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/pr-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-1678-protection-orders

This Puerto Rico law provides that, in all cases in which a person is accused of domestic violence or child abuse, the court shall, by petition of party, issue a protection order for the petitioner so that he/she be the sole custodian of the animal. The court shall order the accused to keep far away from the animal and prohibit contact of any kind. Violation is a fourth-degree felony.

23. South Carolina

Code 1976 § 20-4-60

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/sc-domestic-violence-protection-domestic-abuse-act

South Carolina now allows a judge to issue a protective order that prohibits the harm or harassment against any pet animal owned, possessed, kept, or held by the petitioner; any family or household member designated in the order; or the respondent if the petitioner has a demonstrated interest in the pet animal.The law also allows the judge to issue a protective order that provides for temporary possession of the personal property, including pet animals, of the parties and order assistance from law enforcement officers in removing personal property of the petitioner if the respondent's eviction has not been ordered.

24. Tennessee

TN ST §36-3-601; T. C. A. § 36-3-601

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/tn-domestic-violence-part-6-domestic-abuse

Tennessee's Domestic Abuse definition includes inflicting, or attempting to inflict, physical injury on any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by an adult or minor.

25. Texas

V.T.C.A., Family Code § 85.021, TX FAMILY § 85.021

In a protective order in Texas, the court may prohibit a party from removing a pet, companion animal, or assistance animal, as defined by Section 121.002, Human Resources Code, from the possession of a person named in the order.

26. Vermont

VT ST T. 15 § 1103; 15 V.S.A. § 1103

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/vt-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-1103-requests-relief

Vermont law was amended to allow a court to include an order relating to the possession, care and control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held as a pet by either party or a minor child residing in the household in a domestic violence situation.

27. Virginia

VA Code Ann.§§ 16.1-253, 16.1-253.1, 16.1-253.4, 16.1-279.1, 19.2-152.8, 19.2-152.9, and 19.2-152.10

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/va-domestic-violence-protective-orders

In 2014, Virginia amended its Protective Order laws to grant petitioners possession of any “companion animal," so long as the petitioner is considered the owner. Companion animals include any family pets, such as dogs, cats, hamsters, etc., but do not include farm animals. To be considered an owner, a petitioner must either have a property interest in the animal, keep or house the animal, have the animal in their care, or have acted as a custodian of the animal. This new provision is now included in Virginia's Emergency Protective Orders, Preliminary Protective Orders, and Protective Orders.

28. Washington

WA ST 26.50.060; West's RCWA 26.50.060

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/wa-domestic-violence-2650060-relief-duration-realignment-designation-parties-award-costs

This Washington law reflects the state's provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. In addition to other forms of relief, a court may also order possession and use of essential personal effects. Personal effects may include pets. The court may order that a petitioner be granted the exclusive custody or control of any pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, respondent, or minor child residing with either the petitioner or respondent and may prohibit the respondent from interfering with the petitioner's efforts to remove the pet. The court may also prohibit the respondent from knowingly coming within, or knowingly remaining within, a specified distance of specified locations where the pet is regularly found.

29. West Virginia

WV ST § 48-27-503; W. Va. Code, § 48-27-503

https://www.animallaw.info/statute/wv-domestic-violence-%C2%A7-48-27-503-permissive-provisions-protective-order

In West Virginia, the terms of a protective order may include awarding the petitioner the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept or held by either the petitioner or the respondent or a minor child residing in the residence or household of either the petitioner or the respondent and prohibiting the respondent from taking, concealing, molesting, physically injuring, killing or otherwise disposing of the animal and limiting or precluding contact by the respondent with the animal.

Pets in Protection Orders by State

http://nationallinkcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/PPO-StateSummary.pdf

Functional Links Between Intimate Partner Violence and Animal Abuse:

Personality Features and Representations of Aggression

Society and Animals

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/00000179.pdf

Acts of intimate partner violence (IPV) and abuse of nonhuman animals are common, harmful, and co-occurring phenomena. The aim of the present study was to identify perpetrator subtypes based on variable paths hypothesized to influence physical violence toward both partners and nonhuman animals: (a) callousness and instrumental representations of aggression and (b) rejection sensitivity and expressive representations of aggression. Strong associations emerged between callousness and instrumental representations and between rejection-sensitivity and expressive representations. For males, callousness directly predicted both IPV and animal abuse. For females, rejection-sensitivity predicted IPV. Instrumental representations mediated the relationship between callousness and animal abuse for females but not for males. Results suggest that IPV and animal abuse functionally interconnect, that perpetration of animal abuse may differ in function across gender, and that identifying distinct pathways to violence may facilitate violence prediction and prevention.

Addressing “the Link” to Keep Human & Animal Victims Safer

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF00000/The%20Link%20With%20DV_Association%20of%20Prosecuting%20Attorneys_10-4-12.pdf

Dr. Maya Gupta's presentation on addressing "the Link" between domestic violence and animal cruelty as presented at the 3rd National Animal Cruelty Prosecution Conference: Prosecuting Animal Cruelty & Preserving Community Safety.

The Link For Prosecutors

American Humane

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/00000181.pdf

State Criminal Animal Protection Laws

Association of Prosecuting Attorneys

http://apainc.org/

http://www.apainc.org/default.aspx?act=documents.aspx&Category=Animal+Cruelty+and+Fighting

Alabama Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Alabama%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Alabama are found in four different chapters of the Code of Alabama: Title 2, Chapter 15; Title 3, Chapter 1; Title 13A, Chapter 11; and Title 13A Chapter 12. This document begins Title 13A (“the criminal code”) Chapter 11 (“offenses against public order and safety”) Article 1 (“offenses against public order and decency”). It summarizes each subsection that relates to animals, including the overarching law against intentional and reckless cruelty, neglect, and infliction of injury or death, as well as specific laws pertaining to police dogs and greyhounds used for racing.

Alaska Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Alaska%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Alaska’s criminal animal protection laws can be found in Title 11 (Criminal Law) and Title 3 (Agriculture, Animals, and Food). Title 11 contains the state’s main animal cruelty statute (§ 11.61.140), as well as the statute criminalizing animal-fighting exhibitions (§ 11.61.145). Title 3 contains general definitions (§ 03.55.190), minimum standards of animal care (§ 03.55.100), investigation of cruelty complaints (§ 03.55.110), seizure (§ 03.55.120), and destruction and adoption (§ 03.55.130). Alaska case law relates almost entirely to the main cruelty statute (§ 11.61.140).

Arizona Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Arizona%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

This document begins with the cruelty to animals statute. This statute also provides penalties for interfering, killing or harming a working or service animal. Both misdemeanor and felony penalties are provided for within this section of Chapter 29. The following section contains Arizona’s bestiality statute which states that engaging in oral sexual contact, sexual contact, or sexual intercourse with an animal is unlawful. This includes causing another person to engage in those same activities with an animal and a violation of either will result in a class 6 felony conviction. However, if one causes a minor to engage in this conduct, it is a class 3 felony. The court may also order those convicted of bestiality to undergo a psychological evaluation and participate in appropriate counseling sessions.

Arkansas Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/00000199.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Arkansas include consolidated cruelty and animal fighting laws. Under the Arkansas code, animal(s) abuse can result in the animal being forfeited for an indefinite period of time, or the court can order a mental evaluation and or psychological/psychiatric treatment of the abuser. Moreover, after conviction of animal cruelty, up to one year in jail may be ordered and up to a $1,000 fine may be issued for each animal abused. Case law has firmly established the award of restitution for the keeper or caregiver of a forfeited animal. The court may order the offender to pay restitution to house and/or treat the forfeited animal, and may hold the animal until restitution is paid. This document begins with the offenses of cruelty to animals; aggravated cruelty to dog, cat, or horse; animal fighting; animal dying; and bear exploitation. This document then addresses exemptions to the aforementioned offenses. Then, the document addresses Arkansas sentencing laws.

California Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/California%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in California can be found throughout various parts of the Penal, Food & Agriculture, and Health & Safety Codes; Title 14 of the Penal Code, "Malicious Mischief," contains most of these laws, but others are included in Penal Code Titles 9, 10 and 13. In addition, the Food & Agriculture Code has criminal animal protection laws as well as Sections providing affirmative defenses to livestock owners for killing and/or seizing dogs.

Colorado Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Colorado%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

In Colorado, criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily within Title 18.9, the Cruelty to Animals section of Article 9 of the Colorado Criminal Code, Offenses Against Public Peace, Order, and Decency, which include the state's anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions. However, there are also other laws related to animal cruelty defined elsewhere within the Code of Colorado, including Article 42 of Title 35, Agriculture, cited as the "Animal Protection Act" regarding rights of agricultural animals. This document lists each animal protection law currently in place and the procedural sections of each law with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from Colorado follows each law. This summary begins with statutes under Title 18.9, including the basic cruelty to animal statute and moves on to the unlawful ownership of dangerous dogs, animal fighting, tampering or drugging of livestock, and then moves on to statutes under Title 35, including the protection of animals mistreated, neglected, or abandoned and the euthanasia of injured animals. The remaining portion of the summary details penalties, punishments, and enforcement statutes relating to animal cruelty.

Connecticut Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/CT%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

Connecticut’s prohibitions against cruelty to animals fall within a comprehensive statutory framework. Central prohibitions are listed within the document, and discussed in the following order: •Title 22 – Agriculture. Domestic Animals -Chapter 435 – Dogs and Other Companion Animals. Kennels and Pet Shops •Title 29 – Public Safety and State Police -Chapter 530A.– Connecticut Humane Society •Title 53. Crimes. -Chapter 945. (Offenses Against Humanity and Morality) Cruelty to Animals. Connecticut cases found on PetAbuse.com are also included in this document.

Delaware Animal Cruelty Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/Delaware%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The criminal animal cruelty laws for the state of Delaware can be found primarily within Title 11: Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Chapter 5: Specific Offenses, under Subchapter VII: Offenses Against Public Health, Order and Decency. The general anti-cruelty provisions for the state, as well as general definitions regarding animals can be found within §1325 of this subchapter. This summary begins with the most prominent animal cruelty laws in Delaware, which address an animal owner's duties; abandonment; and cruelty to animals generally, including both active and passive cruelty. These laws also address the selling or trading of the fur or pelt of a domestic dog or cat, animal fighting and baiting, and maintaining a dangerous animal.

District of Columbia Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/District%20of%20Columbia%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in the District of Columbia consist of the consolidated cruelty statutes in sect. 22-1001 - 1015 of the DC Code, containing the animal cruelty and animal fighting provisions.& sect. 22-1001 sets forth the definition and penalty for animal cruelty. Prior codifications were 1973 sect. 22-801 and 1980 sect. 22-801, designated as such below if applicable & sect. 22-1013 defines "animal" as including all living and sentient beings with the exception of humans.

Florida Animal Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/FL%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

Title 46 Ch. 828 contains most of Florida’s laws related to animals. There are provisions for both misdemeanor, 828.12(1), and felony, 828.12(2), animal cruelty violations. Euthanasia of a suffering animal may be a complete defense , although the manner in which euthanasia is to be performed is proscribed by law . Local laws may exist, as provided in § 828.27(2), these specific rules are outside the scope of this document, but § 828.27(2) is summarized in the last section. In general, laws are in order of likely relevance, with animal cruelty and abandonment summarized first.

Georgia Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Georgia%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Georgia's criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily in Title 4 (Animals) and Title 16 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Official Code of Georgia. The main anti-cruelty laws in Title 4 can be found in Chapters 8, 11, and 13. Chapters 8 and 13 deal specifically with dogs and equines, respectively. The provisions of Chapter 11, Article 1 ("Georgia Animal Protection Act") encompass a broad range of issues concerning the treatment, care, and licensing of animals. Many of these provisions (particularly those dealing with unlawful acts and with the inspection, seizure, and impound or animals), are discussed below, while others are beyond the scope of this summary.

Hawaii Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Hawaii%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Hawaii are relatively recent and minimal case law interpreting, enforcing, or applying these laws exist. Additionally, because of Hawaii's unique status as an island state, the State has enacted laws allowing the removal or destruction of non-native animals that damage the native Hawaiian habitat. In fact, one can be penalized or imprisoned if one is caught harboring or raising some of these animals. These statutes are older than the criminal animal protection laws, and there may be some possibility for conflict.

Idaho Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Idaho%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The criminal animal cruelty laws for the state of Idaho can be found primarily within Title 25 of West's Idaho Code Annotated, Animals, Chapter 35: Animal Care. This document begins with the cruelty to animals statutes in Idaho. The additional statutes in this section include poisoning animals, carrying an animal in a cruel manner and beating and harassing animals, which includes whipping, beating or other malicious treatment of any animal, or harassing any cattle, horses, sheep, or hogs with a dog. The next section contains the animal fighting provisions. The current cockfight statute has been amended and the new statute becomes effective on July 1, 2012. The dogfight statute makes it a felony to knowingly own, possess, train, keep, buy or sell dogs for the purpose of fighting, killing, maiming, or injuring other dogs. It is also a felony to advertise, promote, organize and participate in such exhibitions. Under Idaho law, it is permissible for any officer qualified by law to make arrests to enter the premises where there is an exhibition of fighting birds or animals or where preparations for such events take place and without warrant arrest them all.

Illinois Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/Illinois%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Illinois consist of those in the Humane Care for

Animals and Animal Control Acts as well as various criminal provisions that are not included in either of these Acts. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections of each Act with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that Act. The laws are followed by case law from Illinois and/or other states with similar statutes where available.

Indiana Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/IndianaAnimal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Indiana consolidates most of its animal cruelty and neglect statutes within Title 35, Criminal Law and Procedure, Article 46, Miscellaneous Offenses, Chapter 3, Offenses Relating to Animals. There are provisions under other titles as well relating to animal abuse and neglect in different contexts, including domestic violence, commercial animal breeding and sales, humane slaughter of livestock, public health and animal fighting.

Definitions are common grounds for appeals, although rarely successfully. Indiana courts have held consistently that the abuse and neglect statutes are sufficiently clear in their prohibitions and that several means of proof are admissible to prove each statute. Where definitions, applicability or penalties apply only to a particular article or chapter of law, such is indicated in parentheses next to the title of the statute.

Animal fighting statutes prohibit not only the staging of such contests, but also attendance, possession of an animal or paraphernalia relating to such contests, and the purchase of an animal for such purposes.

Livestock statutes in this summary are limited to the means of slaughter.

Miscellaneous statutes prohibit bestiality, coloring birds or rabbits, removing the vocal cords of an attack dog, using animal cruelty as a means to domestic violence, or harboring a non-immunized dog.

Wild animals are deemed the property of the state. Statutes pertaining to the taking of wild animals have been excluded, although cruelty laws are applicable to all animals. A town may prohibit the possession of exotic or wild animals for the welfare of the animal or safety of the public.

Provisions pertaining to animals for sale include restrictions on animal age and care.

Penalties may include fines, imprisonment, impoundment of animals and permanent loss of custody or possession of the animals.

Iowa Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Iowa%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The criminal animal protection laws of Iowa consist of two main chapters, addressing the abuse and neglect of non-livestock and livestock animals, respectively. The state has various additional criminal provisions including laws for the prevention of animal fighting and for the care of animals in commercial establishments. This digest presents each of these animal protection laws along with the relevant procedural laws or defenses, where available. Following each law is case law from Iowa, or from other states with similar statutes where little or no Iowa cases are available.

Kansas Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Kansas%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The primary provisions pertaining to animal cruelty are consolidated within a single statute, § 21-6412. Most additional animal cruelty codes in Kansas are contained in § 21, Crimes Against Public Morals. Statutes related specifically to the humane slaughter of livestock animals are contained in their own chapter, under § 47. A bestiality provision relating specifically to sodomy is also contained within § 21.

Kentucky Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Kentucky%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

In Kentucky, the majority of the basic animal cruelty and animal fighting laws are contained within Title 525 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes. Other titles contain numerous provisions relating to the seizure of roaming dogs lacking identification tags, as well the role of dog wardens and/peace officers in the capture and destruction of such dogs. There are also some additional statutes pertaining to the general inability of veterinarians to obtain immunity in reporting suspected animal abuse, treatment of race horses, and use of reptiles in religious services. Additionally, relevant case law, including Kentucky Attorney General opinions, has been included where it affects the interpretation of listed statutes.

Louisiana Animal Cruelty Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/Louisiana%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary%202.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Louisiana are contained primarily within Title 14, specifically § 14:102.1. However, there are a number of laws related to animal cruelty and defined elsewhere within the Louisiana Revised Statutes Annotated. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from Louisiana follows each law. This document begins with the general animal cruelty statutes and then addresses related statutes involving corporations for prevention of animal cruelty, animal research facilities, photographs of cruelty and assistance dogs. The general animal cruelty statutes cover a range of issues including dogfighting, dangerous dog provisions, euthanasia standards and various penalties, punishments, and enforcements.

Maine Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/00000198.pdf

Maine's prohibitions against cruelty to animals fall within a comprehensive statutory framework. Central prohibitions are listed in this document, and discussed in the following order:

Title 7 - Agriculture and Animals

Chapter 717 - Animal Welfare Act, 7 M.R.S.A. §§ 3901 - 10-B.

Chapter 739 - Cruelty to Animals, 7 M.R.S.A. §§ 4011-19.

See also Chapter 731 - Mistreatment of Animals, 7 M.R.S.A. § 3971-72 (concerning vivisection and unlawful use).

Title 17 - Crimes

Chapter 42 - Animal Welfare (Subchapters 1-4), 17 M.R.S.A. §§ 1011-46.

Maryland Animal Cruelty Summary

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Maryland%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary%202.pdf

Maryland’s criminal animal protection laws consist of the consolidated statutes in § 10-601 through § 10-623 of the Criminal Code. These sections consist of the general cruelty statutes as well as animal fighting statutes and specific statutes meant to protect specific types of animals. Under these statutes, an animal is “any creature except a human being.” General animal cruelty is set out in § 10-604, while aggravated animal cruelty is § 10-606. There is also another statute in a separate section of the Criminal Code barring bestiality and a statute in the Agriculture Code that provides criminal punishment for the improper slaughter of cattle. While Maryland has a number of statutes protecting animals, there is very little case law regarding prosecutions and many of the cases available were pursued under prior versions of the statute. Where prior versions of the code are relevant, they are noted below.

Massachusetts Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/Massachusetts%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Massachusetts can be found throughout various chapters and titles of Part I, "Administration of the Government," and Part IV, "Crimes, Punishments, and Proceedings in Criminal Cases." The criminal animal protection provisions in Part I consist of those in Titles XIX, "Agriculture and Conservation," and XX, "Public Safety and Good Order." Most of Massachusetts' animal protection laws, however, are located in Title I, "Crimes and Punishments," of Part IV. This digest lists each animal protection law and, where available, Massachusetts Case Law and Attorney General Opinions, as well as case law from other states with similar statutes.

Michigan Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/MI%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Michigan can be found throughout various parts of the Penal, Animal Industry, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, and Health Codes. The Michigan Penal Code, “Animals,” § 750.49 – .70 contains most of these laws. In addition, the Natural Resources and Environmental Protections laws cover discharge of substances injurious to animals and the Health Codes govern veterinary reporting. The Animal Industry laws regulate pet shop owners, breeders and the use of animals in research. This digest lists each animal protection law and, where available, Michigan Case Law.

Minnesota Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Minnesota%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

In Minnesota, criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily within the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Chapter of Police Regulations. There are also other laws related to animal cruelty and defined elsewhere within the Minnesota Statutes. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections of each law with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from Minnesota will follow. Please note that the case law cited are primarily unpublished opinions. This document begins with the general animal cruelty statutes and then addresses related statutes involving animal fighting and use of animals as prizes or in advertising. The miscellaneous section includes a bestiality provision and cruelty provisions related to public safety and police animals.

Mississippi Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Mississippi%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Mississippi consolidates most of its animal cruelty and abuse statutes within Title 97, Crimes, under Chapter 41, Cruelty to Animals. Title 97 also includes a prohibition against bestiality under Chapter 29, Crimes Against Morals and Decency, and against failing to isolate animals known to carry certain infectious diseases under Chapter 27, Crimes Affecting Public Health. This document presents Chapter 41 in its entirety and the relevant sections of chapters 29 and 27, including a summary of any relevant case law.

Missouri Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Missouri%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Missouri's animal protection statutes consist of the Consolidated Cruelty statutes, animal baiting and fighting statutes, and other offenses. The bulk of the statutes are contained within Chapter 578, Miscellaneous Offenses . Sections 578.005 through 578.050 cover animal abuse, neglect, and animal fighting offenses. Sections 578.170 through 578.179 contain additional statutes covering baiting and fighting of animals. Other statutes cover harm to service animals and bear wrestling. This document lists the statutes followed by relevant case law from Missouri, where available. Cases from other states are also included where laws are similar. A brief overview of Missouri's sentencing guidelines can be found on the final page of this document.

Montana Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Montana%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary%202.pdf

Montana's animal protection laws can be found in Title 45 (Crimes) and Title 81 (Livestock). Title 45 contains statutes that define the offenses of animal cruelty (45-8-211) and aggravated animal cruelty (45-8-217), and provides penalties for harming a police dog (45-8-209) and animal-fighting (45-8-210). Title 81 contains a statute that controls the killing of dogs that harass, destroy or injure livestock (81-7-401) as well as statutes prohibiting aerial hunting (81-7-501) and harassing livestock (81-7-506). Title 81 also contains a description of unlawful acts regarding animal facilities (81-30-103), actions for damages (81-30-104) and penalties (81-30-105).

Nebraska Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Nebraska%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The majority of Nebraska’s animal laws are located within Chapter 28, entitled “Crimes and Punishments;” however, the laws relating to livestock are located within Chapter 54, entitled “Livestock.” Nebraska’s animal laws primarily focus on animal fighting, cruelty and neglect, and indecency with animals, but other laws also govern the sale of young puppies and kittens and the mistreatment of a service animal. This summary begins with the animal fighting provisions and proceeds to cruelty and neglect, laws dealing with mistreatment of service animals, indecency with animals, sale of puppies and kittens, and finally treatment of livestock.

Nevada Animal Cruelty Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/Nevada%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The criminal animal cruelty laws for the state of Nevada can be found primarily within Title 50 of West's Nevada Revised Statutes Annotated, Animals, Chapter 574: Cruelty to Animals: Prevention and Penalties, Societies for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. This document begins with Nevada's animal cruelty and neglect provisions. This section also provides felony charges for the mistreatment of a police animal, including interfering with the animal's duties and misdemeanor charges for allowing a dog or cat to remain unattended in a vehicle during periods of extreme heat or cold that may endanger their health or safety. The second section of this document includes Nevada's animal fighting statutes. The following section also allows for an officer of a society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, who is authorized to make arrests, to take possession of any animals being treated cruelly. The statute provides that the officer must provide shelter and care or may destroy the animal in a humane manner upon receiving permission from the owner. In cases where an animal is seized under these conditions, notice must be given or mailed to the owner immediately upon ascertaining their location. These provisions do not apply to any animals found on land being used for agricultural use.

New Hampshire Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/NH%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

New Hampshire criminal protection laws are found in chapter 644. This document includes animal cruelty, fighting and protection statutes as well as relevant case law if available. The document also includes examples of animal cruelty cases from the website PetAbuse.com

New Jersey Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/New%20Jersey%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

In New Jersey, criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily within Title 4, the Cruelty to Animal laws. There are also other laws related to animal cruelty and defined elsewhere within the New Jersey Statutes Annotated. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections of each law with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from New Jersey follows each law.

New Mexico Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/New%20Mexico%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in New Mexico are contained within Article 18 of Chapter 30. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When applicable, relevant case law from New Mexico follows each law. This document begins with the general animal cruelty statutes and then addresses related statutes such as those involving unlawful use or confinement of animals, animal fighting, and laws pertaining to livestock.

New York Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/New%20York%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary%20.pdf

New York's criminal animal protection laws are primarily contained in Article 26 of New York's Agriculture and Markets Law (§ 331 - 379), which also contains other more specific provisions related to treatment of animals as well as regulations for animal involved businesses and products derived from animals. There are also other laws related to animal cruelty elsewhere in New York law and they are included in this document as well. This document lists the animal protection laws in place in New York, current as of 2012. When available, relevant New York case law follows the statute listed. This summary begins with the general definitions and more general criminal animal cruelty statutes, follows with the more specific criminal animal cruelty provisions, and ends with the laws related to enforcement. Civil penalties or violations have not been included.

North Carolina Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/North%20Carolina%20Criminal%20Summary%20.pdf

In North Carolina, criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily in §§14-360 through14-363. However, there are also other laws related to animal cruelty in the North Carolina General Statutes. This document lists each animal protection law currently in place and the procedural sections of each case law that North Carolina follows from each law. This summary begins with the basic cruelty to animal statute and moves on to immunity for veterinarians reporting animal cruelty, instigating cruelty, abandonment, cockfighting, dog fighting, baiting, cruel restraint, cruel conveyance, living baby chicks, rabbits under eight weeks of age, novelties forbidden, confiscation of cruelly treated animals, prohibitions on computer-assisted remote hunting, treatment of endangered species, and other unlawful acts toward animals.

North Dakota Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/North%20Dakota%20Criminal%20Summary.pdf

Nearly all of North Dakota’s animal laws are located in Title 36 of the North Dakota Statutes, entitled “Livestock”, but there is also a provision in Title 12 for killing or injuring a law enforcement animal. North Dakota’s animal laws deal primarily with cruelty, neglect, abandonment, and abuse, with other laws that govern advertising and sale of animals and animal fighting. This summary begins with general cruelty and neglect provisions and moves through animal fighting, advertising and sale of animals, killing of law enforcement animals, ownership of skunks or raccoons, immunity to the statutes, and penalties for violation of the statutes. Applicable case law follows each statute where available.

Ohio Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Ohio%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Ohio has general and specific criminal animal cruelty statutes. The general statutes are Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 959.13, Cruelty to Animals, and § 959.131, Cruelty against Companion Animals. There are statutes that address more narrowly defined crimes, such as poisoning animals, although these are rarely used. Nearly all of Ohio’s animal cruelty statutes can be located in Title IX. Agriculture—Animals—Fences. The statutes and relevant case law cited throughout this document pertain specifically to domestic animals, wild animals, and livestock animals in accordance with the language of a given statute.

Oklahoma Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Oklahoma%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

The criminal animal cruelty laws for the state of Oklahoma can be found primarily within Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes Annotated, Crimes and Punishments, Part VII: Crimes Against Property, Chapter 67: Injuries to Animals. This act is known as the Animal Facilities Protection Act. OK ST T. 21 §1680. The main focus of this act is the prohibition of animal cruelty and animal fighting. Animal cruelty in Oklahoma is defined as the willful or malicious torturing, destruction or killing of an animal. This also includes cruelly beating, injuring, maiming or mutilating an animal, regardless of whether it is wild or tame or whether it belongs to the person perpetrating the violence or someone else. In addition, the deprivation of necessary food, drink, shelter or veterinary care to prevent suffering to an animal is also considered animal cruelty. Animal cruelty carries a felony charge and can be punished by imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term not exceeding five years, , imprisonment in the county jail for a term not exceeding one year or by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars.

Oregon Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Oregon%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Oregon are contained primarily in Title 16, “Crimes and Punishments”, under Chapter 167, “Offenses Against Public Health, Decency and Animals”. Most of the relevant provisions, including the crimes and procedural matters, are found in the Oregon Revised Statutes “Offenses Against Animals,” Sections 167.310-.390. The penalties for the offenses are described in Chapter 161, “General Provisions”, of Title 16. There are exemptions written both within some statutes and in a separate statute. A separate provision, Chapter 686, defines the obligations and penalties of veterinarians.

Pennsylvania Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/00000196.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Pennsylvania consist mainly of those in the Cruelty to Animals statute. This document lists each provision in the Cruelty to Animals statute and the procedural sections with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that Act. This document also addresses animal protection laws that are not included in the Cruelty to Animals statute. Each of the laws is followed by case law from Pennsylvania, and/or other states with similar statutes, where available.

Rhode Island Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/00000201.pdf

Rhode Island laws pertaining to animal care and licensing can be found in Title 4 Animals and Animal Husbandry. This document sets out laws pertaining to animal cruelty, humane care of animals, and treatment of animals at state rodeos followed by interpretive case law. Case law from other jurisdictions with similar animal cruelty laws is referenced where Rhode Island case law is lacking. Other laws pertaining to the humane treatment of animals can be found in Animals and Animal Husbandry chapters 19 and 20. Chapter 19 deals with the protection of owners of pets from the sale and use of stolen pets. The chapter also provides guidelines for pet shop owners, transporters, and animal shelters for providing humane care and treatment of animals while in their possession. Chapter 20 sets out guidelines and criteria for rodeo and rodeo-related events to ensure the humane treatment of rodeo animals and livestock in the state.

South Carolina Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/South%20Carolina%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

In South Carolina, the majority of the basic animal cruelty laws are contained within Title 47 of the South Carolina Code of Laws. Title 16, which encompasses crimes and offenses, includes the Animal Fighting and Baiting Act. The State has comprehensive wildlife protection laws, which are enumerated in Title 50.

South Dakota Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/South%20Dakota%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

In South Dakota, criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily within the Cruelty, Abuse and Injury to Animals Chapter of Title 40, Animals and Livestock. There is also a bestiality provision under the Sex Offenses Chapter of Title 22, Crimes. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections of each law with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from South Dakota will follow. This document begins with the general animal cruelty statutes and then addresses related statutes involving animal fighting, dangerous animals and diseased or fatally injured animals. The general animal cruelty statutes are broken up into intentional acts and neglect. Besides the bestiality provision, statutes related to treatment of livestock and service animals can be found under the miscellaneous section of this document. Exemptions include regulated scientific experiments using live animals and the destruction of dangerous animals.

Tennessee Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Tennessee%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Laws.pdf

This summary begins with § 39-14-202, which addresses cruelty to animals. It divides cruelty to animals in categories that include torture, neglect (failure to provide adequate food, water, care, or shelter), abandonment, improper transportation, harm related to competition, and harmful restraint. About half of the cases address torture, resulting from, e.g., beating a dog, shooting a dog, untreated illness, and unsanitary conditions. The other half of the cases address neglect, resulting from, e.g., putting too many horses on a small pasture, keeping dogs in an unsanitary kennel with inadequate food and water, and untreated illnesses. § 39-14-201 defines terms used in § 39-14-202, such as torture. Neglect of a dog’s injuries is an example of torture.

§ 39-14-203 prohibits involvement in any aspect of animal fighting, including being a spectator, keeping or training an animal for fighting, or permitting an animal fight to take place on one’s premises. In most cases, the guilty parties are caught in the dog fighting episodes.

According to § 39-14-205, intentional killing of animals is prohibited, unless the animal poses imminent serious harm. Convictions usually result from shooting a dog.

The remaining provisions address specific animals or issues, including dyed baby fowl or rabbits (§ 39-14-204), impounded animals (§ 39-14-207), guide dogs (§ 39-14-208), horse shows (§ 39-14-209), livestock (§ 39-14-211), removal of electronic or radio dog collar or microchip implant (§ 39-14-213), sexual activity with animals (§ 39-14-214), emergency care (§ 39-14-215), aggravated cruelty to livestock (§ 39-14-217), and the Farm Animal and Research Facilities Protection Act (§§ 39-14-802-06).

Texas Criminal Animal Protection Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Texas%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Criminal animal protection laws in Texas consist primarily of four provisions of the Texas Penal Code which cover cruelty to livestock and nonlivestock animals, attacks on assistance animals and dog fighting. This document sets out each of these laws and highlights relevant case law developments for each.

Utah Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Utah%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The criminal animal cruelty laws for the state of Utah can be found primarily within Title 76 of West’s Utah Code Annotated, Utah Criminal Code, Chapter 9: Offenses Against Public Order and Decency, Part 3: Cruelty to Animals. This document begins with the general provisions and definitions for animal cruelty within the state of Utah.

Vermont Animal Cruelty Laws

http://www.apainc.org/files/DDF/Vermont%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Vermont statutes provide protection for animals against killing, beating, and inhumane confinement. They include basic requirements for shelter, exercise, care, and sanitation. Importantly, though, these cruelty laws are not applicable to agricultural animals. However, there are extensive laws governing the transport of animals and these do apply to agricultural animals. The transport laws include a provision making it illegal to leave an animal in a parked car in unsafe conditions. Furthermore, the law bans animal fighting and extends liability to anyone viewing such fights, and also bans the shooting of birds for amusement. The law also prohibits leaving poison on one's land for the purpose of killing animals, with an exception for pests. The killing of suspected rabid dogs and wolf-hybrids is legal. Additionally, there is a special provision forbidding the sale of dyed chicks. Lastly, there is no specific provision against bestiality, but the statutes prohibiting child sexual abuse define sexual conduct to include bestiality.

Virginia Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Virginia%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary%20.pdf

In Virginia, criminal animal protection laws are contained primarily within Title 3.2, the Comprehensive Animal Care laws, which include the state's anti-cruelty and animal fighting provisions. However, there are also other laws related to animal cruelty defined elsewhere within the Code of Virginia. This document lists each animal protection law currently in place and the procedural sections of each law with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from Virginia follows each law. This summary begins with the basic cruelty to animal statute and moves on to the neglect of companion animals, followed by relative statutes involving abandonment, animal fighting, and sexual assault. The remaining portion of the summary details penalties, punishments, and enforcement.

Washington Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Washington%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

The criminal animal cruelty laws for the state of Washington can be found primarily within Title 16 of West’s Revised Code of Washington, Animals and Livestock, Chapter 16.52: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

West Virginia Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/West%20Virginia%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

Several parts of the West Virginia Code deal with animal cruelty. These laws can be divided into five categories: those dealing with humane officers, general animal cruelty, dog and cats, hunting, and the humane slaughter of livestock.

Wisconsin Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Wisconsin%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary.pdf

A significant number of Wisconsin's animal cruelty statutes are contained within Chapter 951 of Wisconsin's Statutes and Court Rules, Crimes Against Animals. The statute begins with definitions and an overview of appropriate construction and application of animal cruelty laws, followed by a broad statute, §951.02, on the general mistreatment of animals. Contained within Chapter 951 is a wide array of animal cruelty and neglect laws, concerning everything from transportation of animals to animal fighting to professional animals as well as domestic animals and the sale of animals. Additional provisions relating to animal cruelty in Wisconsin can be found within Chapter 173, Animals; Humane Officers. There are additional laws on animal fighting and the sale of animals, as well as a number of statutes pertaining to animals in custody. Finally, the law regarding humane slaughter of livestock animals is located in Chapter 95, Animal Health and the law regarding bestiality is located in Chapter 944, Crimes against Sexual Morality. Penalties for animal crimes are located in Chapters 95 and 951.

Wyoming Animal Cruelty Laws

http://apainc.org/files/DDF/Wyoming%20Animal%20Cruelty%20Summary%20.pdf

Wyoming has a consolidated animal cruelty provision within Chapter 3 of Title 6. This provision includes a new offense of “household pet animal cruelty.” Wyoming has separate provisions concerning cruelty to livestock in Chapter 29 of Title 11, as well as additional animal cruelty-related provisions in Title 11. This document lists each animal protection law and the procedural sections with which officers must comply when enforcing a provision of that law. When available, relevant case law from Wyoming follows each law.

Sunday, September 7, 2014

09072014 - Ousted Senator David Jaye - Arrested For Threatening Jogger While Drunk - Plea Deal: Disorderly Conduct With Arrest Expunged From Jaye's Record

SENATOR DAVID JAYE POSTS:

01011984 - Macomb County Commissioner David Jaye - Arrested For First Drunk Driving Offense - Macomb County

01011990 - Representative David Jaye - Sexist Views Of Women

02021993 - Senator David Jaye - Arrested For Second Drunk Driving Offense - Macomb County

03052000 - Senator David Jaye - Arrested For Third Driving Offense - Macomb County

06202000 - Senator David Jaye - Senate Reprimand For Drunk Driving Offense (March 05, 2000) - Stripped Of Committee Assignments - Macomb County

07132000 - Senator David Jaye - Sentenced To Jail And Probation For Drunk Driving Offense (March 05, 2000) - Macomb County

11192000 - Senator David Jaye - Arrested For Assault Of Girlfriend In Michigan - Macomb County

11192000 - Senator David Jaye - Probation Violation: MI DV And Driving On Restricted License - Macomb County

03272001 - Senator David Jaye - Committee Assignments Restored After Completing Rehab Program - Macomb County

04122001 - Senator David Jaye - Senate Suspends Jaye's Committee Jobs AGAIN - Jaye Arrested For Assault Of Girlfriend In Florida

05082001 - Senator David Jaye - Mistreatment of Senate Staff - Macomb County

05142001 - Senator David Jaye - Florida DV Charges Dropped; Michigan DV Charges Remain - Macomb County

05242001 - Senator David Jaye - Ousted From Senate - Macomb County

08032001 - Ousted Senator David Jaye - Sentenced: Probation Violation - MI DV And Driving On Restricted License Charges

07032001 - Ousted Senator David Jaye - Announced Decision To Run For Senate Seat He Vacated When He Was Removed From Office [05242001]

10152001 - Ousted Senator David Jaye - Vehicle Suspected Of Forcing Bicyclist Off Road - During Investigation Into Incident, Jaye Takes Job In South Korea

09072014 - Ousted Senator David Jaye - Arrested For Threatening Jogger While Drunk - Plea Deal: Disorderly Conduct With Arrest Expunged From Jaye's Record

Former state Sen. David Jaye accused of threatening jogger on Macomb bike trail

The Detroit News

September 09, 2014

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2014/09/09/former-state-sen-david-jaye-accused-of-threatening-jogger-on-macomb-bike-trail-/15338375/

Washington Township – — A former state senator has been charged with disorderly conduct after police said he threatened a jogger and had a backpack of beer.

David Jaye, expelled from the Legislature in 2001 when he was a Republican from Washington Township, was arrested just before 10 p.m. Sunday after a male jogger called police about a disorderly person on the Macomb Orchard Trail near Campground and Van Dyke, said Lt. John Michalke of the Macomb County Sheriff’s Office Tuesday.

The jogger told police Jaye, of Bonita Springs, Florida, had been chanting and made threats to “hurt” him. Jaye was on a bicycle and wearing a backpack. Michalke said Jaye had slurred speech and smelled of alcohol.

When police searched his backpack they found cans of beer.

Jaye, 56, was taken to the Macomb County jail. He was video-arraigned Monday in the 42nd District Court of Romeo, granted a $1,000 personal bond and released.

Michalke said Jaye told police he was in Michigan because he owns property in Shelby Township, a claim police weren’t able to substantiate.

Jaye was expelled from the state Legislature in 2001 for drunken driving convictions, assault allegations by his fiancée in Fort Myers, Florida, and other problems. After his expulsion Jaye was a visiting professor at Hanyang Graduate School of International Studies in South Korea, according to his LinkedIn page.

But he had to continue attending Alcoholics Anonymous classes in Korea and report monthly to Macomb County probation officials.

The most recent job Jaye held, according to his LinkedIn page, was as an English for speakers of other languages teacher for nighttime classes at Collier County Schools Adult Education in Naples, Florida. A Collier County Schools staffer said Jaye hadn’t work as for them in more than a year. It’s unclear where he’s currently working.

He is next scheduled to appear in 42nd District Court of Romeo at 9 a.m. Sept 25.

Ex-state senator charged with disorderly conduct

David Jaye accused of threatening jogger on Macomb bicycle trail

Detroit News

September 10, 2014

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

Washington Township – A former state senator has been charged with disorderly conduct after police said he threatened a jogger and had a backpack of beer.

The jogger told police Jaye, of Bonita Springs, Florida, had been chanting and made threats to "hurt" him. Jaye was on a bicycle and wearing a backpack. Michalke said Jaye had slurred speech and smelled of alcohol.

When police searched his backpack they found cans of beer.

Jaye, 56, was taken to the Macomb County jail. He was video-arraigned Monday in the 42nd District Court of Romeo, granted a $1,000 personal bond and released.

Michalke said Jaye told police he was in Michigan because he owns property in Shelby Township, a claim police weren't able to substantiate.

Jaye was expelled from the state Legislature in 2001 for drunken driving convictions, assault allegations by his fiancee in Fort Myers, Florida, and other problems. After his expulsion Jaye was a visiting professor at Hanyang Graduate School of International Studies in South Korea, according to his LinkedIn page.

But he had to continue attending Alcoholics Anonymous classes in Korea and report monthly to Macomb County probation officials.

The most recent job Jaye held, according to his LinkedIn page, was as an English for speakers of other languages teacher for nighttime classes at Collier County Schools Adult Education in Naples, Florida. A Collier County Schools staffer said Jaye hadn't work as for them in more than a year. It's unclear where he's currently working.

He is next scheduled to appear in 42nd District Court of Romeo at 9 a.m. Sept 25.

Former Macomb legislator David Jaye arrested after apparent drunken confrontation

Macomb Daily

September 10, 2014

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

David Jaye, the controversial former state senator who struggled for years with excessive drinking, was arrested on Sunday night for disorderly conduct after engaging in an apparently drunken confrontation with a jogger on the Macomb Orchard Trail in Washington Township.

According to the Macomb County Sheriff's Department, Jaye at the time smelled of alcohol, was slurring his speech and looked "sloppy" when he was detained by deputies near Campground Road and Van Dyke. He was riding a bike with beer cans in his backpack when he had a verbal confrontation with the jogger and said: "Don't make me come after you."

Jaye refused to take a portable breathalyzer test, so his blood-alcohol level at the time is unknown. Michigan's disorderly conduct law includes provisions for evidence that a person may have been intoxicated, based on what the arresting officers witnessed.

The only member of the Michigan Senate ever to be removed from office by his colleagues, Jaye, 56, was arrested and jailed by sheriff's deputies shortly before 10 p.m. when the frightened jogger called police. The former lawmaker was also chanting while riding on the trail, but sheriff's Lt. John Michalke refused to identify what the chant consisted of.

A longtime Jaye friend said that he had returned to Macomb County about six weeks ago to rehabilitate the Washington Township home that he lived in during his years in the state Legislature and still owns.

Joe Munem said that Jaye had been consistently sober and had shown no signs of a relapse after struggling with drinking problems for two decades.

"I wouldn't have thought something like this would have happened at this point in his life. I have not seen Dave drink in … 10 years," said Munem, a former political consultant from Sterling Heights.

After his removal from the Senate in 2001 for drunken, assaultive behavior at a gas station, Jaye eventually moved to South Korea, where he taught English as a second language to adults. He has also lived in China, teaching American business customs at the university level.

More recently he established residence in Bonita Springs, Fla., where he landed a county government job handling recycling programs and grant writing.

At the time of his arrest Sunday, which occurred after dark, police found no evidence that Jaye had physically harmed anyone and he appeared to be uninjured despite his erratic bike riding. He was wearing camouflage shorts and a white T-shirt in addition to the black backpack.

Jaye was formally charged in a video arraignment handled by the 42nd District Court in Romeo. The former lawmaker was granted a $1,000 personal bond and was released.

His next court date is Sept. 25 in the 42nd District Court.

Friend says he saw no indication of Jaye return to drunkenness

Oakland Press

September 10, 2014

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

Dave Jaye, the infamous former state senator who struggled for years with excessive drinking, was arrested on Sunday night for disorderly conduct after engaging in an apparently drunken confrontation with a jogger on the Macomb Orchard Trail in Washington Township.

According to the Macomb County Sheriff’s Office, Jaye at the time smelled of alcohol, was slurring his speech and looked “sloppy” when he was detained by deputies near Campground Road and Van Dyke. He was riding a bike with beer cans in his backpack when he had a verbal confrontation with the jogger and said: “Don’t make me come after you.”

Jaye refused to take a portable breathalyzer test so his blood-alcohol level at the time is unknown. Michigan’s disorderly person law includes provisions for evidence that a person may have been intoxicated, based on what the arresting officers witnessed.

The only member of the Michigan Senate ever to be removed from office by his colleagues, Jaye, 56, was arrested and jailed by sheriff’s deputies shortly before 10 p.m. when the frightened jogger called police.

The former lawmaker was also chanting while riding on the hike/bike trail but sheriff’s Lt. John Michalke refused to identify what the chant consisted of.

A longtime Jaye friend said the controversial former lawmaker had returned to Macomb County about six weeks ago to rehabilitate the Washington Township home that he lived in during his years in the state Legislature and still owns.

Joe Munem said Jaye had been consistently sober and had shown no signs of a relapse after struggling with drinking problems for two decades.

“I wouldn’t have thought something like this would have happened at this point in his life. I have not seen Dave drink in … 10 years,” said Munem, a former political consultant from Sterling Heights.

More recently he established residence in Bonita Springs, Fla., where he landed a county government job handling recycling programs and grant writing.

At the time of his arrest on Sunday, which occurred after dark, police found no evidence that Jaye had physically harmed anyone, and he appeared to be uninjured despite his erratic bike riding. He was wearing camouflage shorts and a white T-shirt in addition to the black backpack.

Jaye was formerly charged on Monday in a video arraignment handled by the 42nd District Court in Romeo. The former lawmaker was granted a $1,000 personal bond and was released.

His next court date is Sept. 25 in the 42nd District Court.

Known for his vociferous, politically incorrect comments and his conservative Republican politics, Jaye’s political career began with a 2-year stint on the Macomb County Board of Commissioners in 1985-86.

He was elected to the state House in 1988 and served there for 10 years until he won a special election to replace the late state senator Doug Carl. Among the many reasons for his Senate expulsion, the most cited were his three drunken driving convictions.

His expulsion trial in front of a Senate panel received frenzied media coverage and produce big newspaper headlines across the state.

After attracting considerable public attention for 15 years, his attempted political comeback after being expelled fell flat in a Sept. 11, 2001, special election that was completely overshadowed by the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.

Yet, Munem said he saw a “more mellow and mature Dave Jaye” in recent times, a man who had become more health conscious and had hopes of creating a new chapter in his life in the business world, not in politics. Munem said he has no idea what could have triggered Jaye’s behavior on Sunday.

“In my conversations with him, he’s been fairly upbeat and positive,” Munem explained. “He’s demonstrated a lot of self-confidence about what he wants to do next.”

Ex-state Sen. Jaye gets plea deal in Macomb County

The Detroit News

September 26, 2014

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/macomb-county/2014/09/26/ex-state-sen-jaye-gets-plea-deal-macomb-county/16254083/

Mount Clemens — A former state senator has taken a plea deal for a disorderly conduct charge in Macomb County.

David Jaye, 56, on Thursday pleaded no contest in 42nd District Court in Romeo to the misdemeanor charge following a drunken incident in Washington Township. He also paid a $625 fine. The plea deal allows the arrest to be wiped from his criminal record if he has no other violations within one year.

On Sept. 7, Jaye was charged with disorderly conduct after police said he threatened a jogger and had a backpack of beer.

The jogger told police Jaye of Bonita Springs, Florida, had been chanting and made threats to “hurt” him. Jaye was on a bicycle and wearing a backpack. Police said Jaye had slurred speech and smelled of alcohol.

When police searched his backpack they found cans of beer.

Jaye was expelled from the state Legislature in 2001 for drunken driving convictions, assault allegations by his fiancée in Fort Myers, Florida, and other problems. After his expulsion, Jaye was a visiting professor at Hanyang Graduate School of International Studies in South Korea, according to his LinkedIn page.

But he had to continue attending Alcoholics Anonymous classes in Korea and report monthly to Macomb County probation officials.

The most recent job Jaye held, according to his LinkedIn page, was as an English for speakers of other languages teacher for nighttime classes at Collier County Schools Adult Education in Naples, Florida. A Collier County Schools staffer said Jaye hadn’t work there in more than a year. It’s unclear where he’s currently working.

**********************************************************************************************************

Sen. Jaye arrested on suspicion of drunken driving

The Argus-Press

Owosso, Michigan

March 6, 2000

Macomb Township, Mich. [AP] - State Sen. David Jaye was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving and failed a Breathalyzer test early Sunday, a sheriff's inspector said.

Jaye, who has faced drunken driving charges previously, was stopped by sheriff's deputies around 1:30 a.m. on state Highway 59 and released on $100 bond about 6 a.m. Sunday, Macomb County sheriff's Inspector Mark Hackel said. Jaye cooperated with the deputies, Hackel said.

Because Jaye has not been arraigned and the information has not yet been forwarded to prosecutors, Hackel said he could not disclose Jaye's blood-alcohol content though he said he failed the breath test. A blood-alcohol content of 0.10 percent or higher is considered drunk driving under Michigan law.

Jaye's attorney, Rob Huth, said Sunday afternoon he hadn't had a chance to review the sheriff's department report.

"It is my understanding that his blood-alcohol was right at or around the legal limit and there may be mitigating circumstances. If not, I expect him to square up and take responsibility for his actions," Huth said.

A message seeking comment was left on Jaye's answering machine Sunday afternoon.

"I have been a strong supporter of and always voted for tough drunk driving laws that we are all subject to," Jaye said in statement released by his office.

"I am seeking counsel from my family and friends and ask for their prayer during this trying time."

Jaye, a Washington Township Republican, served three weekends in jail in 1993 for drunken driving.

He was arrested Feb. 2, 1993, after rolling through a stop sign in rural Webberville, about 20 miles east of Lansing. he was charged with operating a vehicle under the influence of liquor and having an unlawful bodily alcohol content above 0.10 percent.

Jaye's license was suspended for six weeks and restricted for six months.

He also was ticketed in 1984 in Sterling Heights for operating a vehicle while impaired by liquor.

Three years ago, Jaye said he had put the 1993 case behind him.
"I said I wouldn't be drinking and driving any more," he said then. "I'm married now. Getting married changes a person's lifestyle and priorities."

Jaye is a conservative Republican who was first elected to the state house in 1993. He has discussed running against U.S. Rep. David Bonior, although he announced in November that he was putting off a decision on whether to run to concentrate on a petition drive calling for public funding of private schools.

If convicted following Sunday's arrest, Jaye could face 40 hours to one year in jail, fines ranging from $200 to $1000, 30 to 90 days of community service, and loss of a driver's license, the Detroit News said.

"He's not looking for any special treatment and he's still a supporter of tough laws," Huth told the Detroit Free Press.

State Sen. Jaye returns to work after jail term

Grand Rapids Press, The (MI)

August 19, 2000

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

LANSING -- State Sen. David Jaye left the St. Clair County Jail early Friday and held a late-afternoon news conference in his Senate office to say he's back on the job.

"Today I am once again taking personal responsibility for my actions," said Jaye, R-Washington Township. "I've become a very strong example of how serious drunken driving is and how serious the consequences are."

Jaye was arrested March 5 in Macomb Township on his second drunken-driving offense. While a state representative in 1993, Jaye spent 10 days in jail after a drunken-driving conviction. This time, he was sentenced to 45 days but was released after 35. He received time off for good behavior.

Jaye has supported bills that took away time off for good behavior for prison inmates convicted of rapes, murders and serious assaults. He said he stands by that vote.

During his time in jail, Jaye said he was in the kitchen most days by 4:30 a.m., mopping floors, preparing food and washing dishes for 12 or 16 hours. He said he didn't sleep well a lot of nights, especially after two jail workers were assaulted by inmates.

"It was frightening," he said of his stay. "Jail is a very serious place."

Jaye continued to receive his annual $56,981 salary while in jail, but said he is working with his lawyers to donate some of it to worthy causes. He has been stripped of his Senate committee assignments but will get them back on Jan. 1 if he successfully completes an alcohol rehabilitation program.

Jaye enrolled in a counseling program shortly after his arrest. His two-year probation will require him to continue attending counseling sessions and to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings twice a week.

He said some inmates were in jail only because they couldn't pay their fees and court costs, and probably could be spending their time more effectively doing community service. He'd also like to require inmates to get vocational training, a high school diploma or equivalent degree before they can leave jail.

"I have done more damage to myself drinking and driving than all my political opponents have done combined," Jaye said. "The worst part for me has been all the pain and heartache my family has faced ... my friends and supporters have faced."

Jaye’s fiancée ordered to testify

Muskegon Chronicle

July 12, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

The fiancée of ousted state Sen. David Jaye has been ordered to testify at Jaye’s upcoming probation violation hearing about allegations that he twice assaulted her.

A Florida resident, Sonia Kloss had avoided a subpoena until last week when she was served at Jaye’s Washington Township home by two investigators from the Macomb County prosecutor’s office.

Jaye faces up to 10 1/2 months in jail for allegedly assaulting Kloss in Bay County in November and in Florida in April. A third charge claims Jaye violated his restricted driver’s license, which had been issued due to a drunken driving conviction.

In May, those three incidents were the foundation for the “pattern of personal misconduct” that led to Jaye becoming the first senator in Michigan history to be expelled from office. Kloss has denied the alleged assault in Bay County.

In the Florida case, she told police Jaye had beaten her, then later recanted. Because Kloss was issued a subpoena in Michigan, not Florida, she must comply and testify, according to Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga.

Jaye learns today if he goes to jail

Judge will decide if expelled senator violated probation

Detroit News

July 23, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

SHELBY TOWNSHIP -- A Shelby Township district court judge will decide today whether to dismiss probation violation charges against former state Sen. David Jaye -- a move that could keep the expelled lawmaker from going to jail.

Jaye was charged with violating his probation, that stemmed from a drunken driving conviction, because he allegedly assaulted his fiancée twice in the last year and violated his driving restrictions by going deer hunting last November.

But the attorney for Jaye filed a motion asking 41-A District Judge Douglas P. Shepherd to throw out the probation violation case because the assault allegations are unfounded.

Furthermore, attorney Phil Thomas said the probation violation case started six months after the alleged assault and deer hunting incidents surfaced and the delay violates Jaye's constitutional rights.

"When probation violation proceedings are commenced, they must be carried out with due diligence," Thomas said in the legal briefs. "The six month delay ... has violated defendant's due process rights."

Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga said there were valid reasons for the six-month delay.

"The probation department wanted to see what the evidence was, and plus, I granted additional time because (Jaye) was involved in the senate hearings," Marlinga said. "We were ready to file probation violation charges three months before that, but we waited to show him mercy. And showing mercy cannot be used against us."

The state Senate expelled Jaye from office in May following a lengthy inquiry into allegations of supposed misconduct including the incidents involving his fiancée, Jameela Sonia Kloss. The probation violation charges were filed immediately after the expulsion.

Jaye could go back to jail for as long as 101/2 months if convicted. The trial is scheduled to start Aug. 2, but Thomas is hopeful Judge Shepherd will dismiss the case today.

The probation department said in court pleadings that one attack happened last Nov. 19 in Michigan and the other last April 12 in Florida. Kloss has denied that Jaye assaulted her and no charges were ever filed in either case, Thomas said.

Kloss, a Florida resident, was served a subpoena to testify when she visited Jaye at his Washington Township home last month. Thomas, who wants Kloss to testify in a videotaped deposition, is concerned Kloss will be badgered by the media during the proceedings.

But Marlinga said extra security will be added to allow Kloss to come and go from court without being harassed.

Thomas said the more compelling reason the probation violation charge should be dismissed is because Kloss says the attacks never happened.

"The mere fact that Ms. Kloss originally told the Florida authorities she was assaulted is not sufficient," Thomas said in his pleadings.

"Some type of corroborative information was necessary, prior to charging the defendant with probation violation," Thomas added.

"To say that victims of domestic violence often recant charges of abuse in order to protect their husband/boyfriend, and then allow that statement to serve as justification for filing a probation violation is not only unreasonable, but unconstitutional as well."

Marlinga said Thomas is "absolutely wrong" because witnesses statements do not have to be corroborated in probation cases.

"The district court judge will be able to make the determination of what happened," Marlinga said. "We only have to show by the preponderance of evidence what occurred, not beyond a reasonable doubt.

"It' a common-sense situation. It will be what the judge honestly believes happened. Everyone who is familiar with this case knows that David Jaye assaulted his girlfriend."

Thomas said he will have witnesses testify that Jaye did not violate his driving restrictions when he went to a deer hunting camp. Jaye was prohibited from using his car for personal reasons as terms of his probation on drunk driving.

Jaye went to the camp not to hunt, but to talk to hunters about environmental and other issues.

Marlinga said if Thomas uses that defense, it would further damage Jaye's credibility.

Judge refuses to drop charges against Jaye

Ex-senator to measure support for candidacy

Detroit News

July 24, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

SHELBY TOWNSHIP -- Former state Sen. David Jaye received a double dose of unfriendly news Monday.

Shelby Township District Judge Douglas P. Shepherd refused to dismiss probation violation charges against Jaye just about the time that Gov. John Engler announced the dates for a special election to replace Jaye as a state senator. The primary will be Sept. 11 and the general election Nov. 6.

The election filing deadline is Aug. 7, five days after Jaye goes on trial before Shepherd on charges that he violated his drunken driving probation for allegedly assaulting his fiancée, Jameela Sonia Kloss twice in a six month span, and for violating his driving restrictions while on a deer hunting trip last November.

If convicted, Jaye could be sentenced to up to 101/2 months in jail. Shepherd could also sentence Jaye to a lesser jail term or place the former Republican senator on probation.

Jaye said he will decide soon whether he will run in the special election.

He said he would be meeting with key advisers to determine if he has enough support to mount a serious challenge to regain his seat.

"I want to run for Senate, but before I ask supporters, friends and volunteers to go through this, I have to make sure I have at least a 50-50 chance to win," Jaye said.

Kloss said Monday night she will honor the subpoena and come to Shelby Township to testify, and that she will see a doctor today to calm her nerves.

"The grief they are putting me through is never-ending. It's terrifying. I don't want to feel like that but I will come," Kloss said from her Florida home.

"The cameras, the people ... I don't want to go there and face a judge. There is no justice. I am under a lot of pressure and am not accustomed to this kind of attention."

Kloss said she will fly from Florida to Michigan on Aug. 1 -- the day before Jaye's trial -- and leave the day after.

Eric Kaiser, chief trial lawyer for the Macomb County Prosecutor's Office, said if Kloss doesn't show up to testify, he will ask Shepherd to issue a bench warrant to force her to come to court.

Jaye pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor drunken driving charge in June 2000, and was sentenced to 45 days in jail, but could have been sentenced to a year. He served 35 days before he was released and Marlinga wants Jaye to serve the remaining 101/2 months of the original sentence if he is convicted.

Jaye was expelled from office in May by the state Senate following a lengthy hearing delving into a series of alleged misconduct supposedly committed by Jaye including accusations he assaulted Kloss, in November 2000, near Bay County and again last April in her home in Florida.

Jaye was never charged with a crime in either case. Kloss has recanted statements that Jaye assaulted her, but Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga said he feels there will be enough evidence to show Jaye did attack her.

Judge Shepherd refused to dismiss the probation violation charge against Jaye, setting the stage next week for the trial.

Jaye's attorney, Phil Thomas, had asked that the charges be thrown out because Jaye was innocent of the charges that led to the probation violation case. Thomas also said Jaye's constitutional rights were violated because it took the prosecutor six months to file the probation violation charge.

Shepherd said he found no evidence that Jaye's rights were violated.

Jaye again professed his innocence and said he would be acquitted of the charge.

"Look, I'm innocent," Jaye told reporters in an impromptu press conference outside of court. "I was innocent in Bay County, I was innocent in Florida and I will be found innocent here. How many times do I have to wash a shirt to show that it is clean?"

Jaye said he also will prove that he was using his car in his duties as a state senator and not on a hunting trip as the prosecutor claims.

Judge Shepherd also denied a motion by Thomas to have Kloss testify at a videotape deposition.

Shepherd said in order for him to make a sound decision in the case, Kloss would have to testify live and not on videotape.

Jaye calls proceeding 'an abuse of my rights'

He faces up to 101/2 months in jail if a judge determines he violated his probation

Grand Rapids Press

August 3, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

SHELBY TOWNSHIP -- The former state senator on trial for allegedly violating his probation says the proceedings are "double jeopardy" because he already has been subjected to Senate hearings over the alleged incidents.

"This is an abuse of my rights and my fiancée's, and it's a waste of taxpayer dollars," David Jaye said.

With her hands shaking as she looked at transcripts, Sonia Kloss defended her fiancé, Jaye, saying he never hit her on the two occasions prosecutors say were violations of Jaye's probation on a drunken driving conviction.

Kloss testified for almost two hours, and took two breaks, in the trial in Macomb County District Court, which began Thursday.

Jaye was expelled from the Senate in May after most of his fellow senators said he no longer deserved to serve, in part because of his three drunken driving convictions and allegations he hit Kloss.

Jaye, who was ousted on a 33-2 vote, is the first senator in state history to be expelled.

Jaye insists he hasn't violated his probation, and has filed to run for the Sept. 11 special election to determine his successor in the Senate.

The general election is scheduled for Nov. 6.

Court proceedings, which were to resume this morning, could decide whether Jaye, of Washington Township, must run for his old seat with a probation violation conviction on his record.

If Judge Douglas Shepherd determines Jaye violated his probation for a 2000 drunken driving conviction, Jaye could have to finish serving his sentence. That could mean he would spend up to 101/2 months in jail.

Kloss admitted she had been drinking heavily before an April 12 incident in Florida and a Nov. 19 incident at a Bay County gas station, but denied Jaye hit her.

Cpl. Robert Macarelli of the Lee County, Fla. Sheriff's Department testified Thursday that Kloss was bleeding from the face and claiming Jaye hit her.

Ex-senator found guilty, fined $500

He could have been sentenced to 101/2 months in jail for violating his probation

Grand Rapids Press

August 3, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

SHELBY TOWNSHIP -- Former state Sen. David Jaye was found guilty Friday of violating his probation.

He was sentenced to 30 days in jail or a $500 fine. He also was ordered by Macomb County District Judge Douglas Shepherd to attend anger management classes and his probation is continued.

"Frankly, Mr. Jaye, it would be easy for me to put you in jail for the full 101/2 months, but I don't think that would be the right thing for me to do," Shepherd said.

Jaye could have been ordered to spend up to 101/2 months in jail for violating his probation for a 2000 drunken driving conviction.

Prosecutors claimed Jaye assaulted his fiancée on two separate occasions, in Florida and in Bay County and that he violated restrictions placed on his driver's license by driving to northern Michigan for a hunting trip.

Shepherd found Jaye guilty of violating his probation as to the alleged incident in Florida and the driving allegation, but innocent as to the alleged Bay County incident.

Jaye said that he planned to testify in his own defense, but those plans never came to be as his attorney rested without calling him to the stand.

Jaye, who was expelled from the Senate in May after most of his fellow senators said he no longer deserved to serve, in part because of his three drunken driving convictions and allegations he hit his fiancée, Sonia Kloss. Jaye, who was ousted on a 33-2 vote, is the first senator in state history to be expelled.

Jaye insists he hasn't violated his probation, and has filed to run for the Sept. 11 special election to determine his successor in the Senate. The general election is scheduled for Nov. 6.

Jaye remained stoic on Thursday during most of the hearing, including during testimony by Kloss. Occasionally he would pass notes or get up and talk to his attorney. He has said he's nervous because it was not a jury trial.

Kloss testified for almost two hours, and took two breaks, in the trial in Macomb County District Court, which began Thursday.

Kloss admitted she had been drinking heavily before an April 12 incident in Florida and a Nov. 19 incident at a Bay County gas station, but denied Jaye hit her.

Jaye's car linked to bicycle incident at Stony Creek

Detroit News

December 10, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP -- Rangers at the Stony Creek Metropark continue their investigation into an incident in which a car owned by expelled state Sen. David Jaye may have forced a bicyclist off the road.

Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga said Sunday there doesn't appear to be enough evidence to charge Jaye with a crime, but the case remains open because rangers have not yet interviewed Jaye about the episode that happened Oct. 15.

Marlinga said the investigation shows that a car registered to Jaye encountered the 36-year-old bicyclist on the roadway portion of a street at Stony Creek and forced the bicyclist off the road.

"The car was driving in an erratic and possibly aggressive manner," Marlinga said. "After the car sped past, the bicyclist got the car's license plate number and the car came back registered to David Jaye."

The bicyclist was unable to identify Jaye from a photo lineup in which the cyclist was shown photographs of the ex-senator and other men with similar physical characteristics, Marlinga said. Without the identification, Jaye could not be charged, Marlinga said.

"The bicyclist could not make a positive identification, but that doesn't surprise me because it was a quick incident," that happened at dusk, Marlinga said.

Jaye was unavailable for comment, but his former attorney said it doesn't appear as if the prosecutor has evidence against the ex-senator and should officially close the case.

"Based upon what I've been told by the news media, it sounds like they have a case that is closed," said Grosse Pointe attorney Phil Thomas. "They should leave this man alone and they shouldn't be discussing this case with the news until the investigation is completed."

Thomas, who has represented Jaye in several cases, stressed he is not Jaye's attorney at present and hasn't spoken to him since the summer.

Thomas said he sees two serious problems with the case. The bicyclist's inability to identify the driver of the car is one problem.

"And how can they be sure the identity of the car license plate was accurate," Thomas said. "There have been cases in the past where people have taken down license plate numbers and they were wrong."

David Jaye takes job in South Korea

Grand Rapids Press

December 21, 2001

https://infoweb.newsbank.com/

SHELBY TOWNSHIP -- Ousted state Sen. David Jaye is moving to South Korea to teach American government for at least two months, his lawyer said.

Macomb County District Judge Doug Shepherd on Thursday gave Jaye permission to take the job, but told the former Republican lawmaker he must keep in touch with his probation officer, attorney Rob Huth said.

Jaye also must continue attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings in Korea, if possible, and continue to pay oversight fees to the court.

Jaye was expelled from the state Senate in May following drunken driving arrests and allegations he struck his then-fiancée. He tried to regain his Senate seat in the special election called to replace him but came in third in the Sept. 11 primary.

State Rep. Alan Sanborn, R-Richmond, now holds the seat.

Jaye was recruited for the teaching job by a company that saw his resume on the job Web site Monster.com. He will teach either U.S. soldiers or South Korean citizens, Huth said. The job has a two-month probationary period. After that Jaye and the company may decide to extend the position, the lawyer said.