Ba v. United States

D.C. Court of Appeals - 2002

The case that “launched” DV LEAP concerned an abuser who argued that, since he had lived with the victim for a few months after she received her protection order, he could not subsequently be prosecuted for violating that order after they broke up.

The trial court and D.C. Court of Appeals both agreed in principle with the abuser’s argument that a “consent defense” should apply to prosecutions for violations of civil protection orders, but held that it did not apply here. After the appellate decision came down, the domestic violence community was extremely concerned about its implications for future protection orders, and DV LEAP’s Founder contacted the relevant government agencies to seek a rehearing.

The government was reluctant to do so because they had technically won the case. The Founder’s intervention, however, persuaded the U.S. Attorney’s Office that a rehearing was important to protect future victims’ protection orders and their enforceability, and that with the support of the domestic violence community a rehearing should be possible. The Founder filed an amicus brief on behalf of six domestic violence organizations (five were local), a rehearing was issued, and the damaging opinion was withdrawn.

The Public Defender Service intervened on the side of the respondent. The ultimate decision left open for future cases the question of whether a “consent defense” should be available.

Please click here to read DV LEAP's amicus brief.

Please click here to read the court's opinion.