Also known as: offences against the public peace · breach of the peace
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A public offense involving violence or conduct likely to cause an immediate disturbance of public order.
Oliver Okeke burned a flag during a political demonstration outside a federal building. No crowd reacted with violence or disorder. Officers arrested him under a desecration rule. The conduct did not meet the elements of an offense against the public peace.
Oscar Ortiz published an article accusing a local official of corruption. The statements reached a wide audience but produced no immediate physical confrontation. The publication did not constitute an offense against the public peace.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Orson Ochoa challenged a city employment practice through a civil rights suit. The underlying conduct involved no violence or public disturbance. The claim did not rest on an offense against the public peace.
Oswald Orozco delivered a speech in a crowded hall that incited listeners to shout and push. Police arrested him under a disorderly conduct statute. The words created an immediate risk of violence and therefore qualified as an offense against the public peace.
Olive Okafor failed to wear a seatbelt during a routine traffic stop. Officers arrested her without a warrant. The violation involved no violence or threat of immediate disorder and therefore was not an offense against the public peace.
Odessa Okada stood on a public sidewalk with others after dark. Police cited the group under a loitering statute. The conduct produced no violence or imminent disturbance and did not amount to an offense against the public peace.
The Restatement defines it as a public offense done by violence or one causing or likely to cause an immediate disturbance of public order. Courts apply this standard when evaluating disorderly conduct or breach-of-peace statutes. The test focuses on the likelihood of immediate disorder rather than later consequences.
Flag burning receives First Amendment protection when it constitutes expressive conduct. The government may not prohibit it solely to suppress the message absent an imminent breach of the peace. The absence of violence or immediate disorder prevents classification as an offense against the public peace.
A seatbelt violation carries no jail time and creates no immediate danger to persons or property. Common-law limits on warrantless misdemeanor arrests often required a breach of the peace. The violation therefore does not qualify as an offense against the public peace.
Speech qualifies when it consists of personally abusive epithets delivered face to face that are inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent response. The fighting-words doctrine supplies the boundary. Mere offensive content without that risk remains protected.
…labels" of state law. N. A. A. C. P. v. Button, 371 U. S. 415, 429. Like insurrection, contempt, advocacy of unlawful acts, breach of the peace, obscenity, solicitation of legal business, and the various other formulae for the repression of expression that have been challenged in this court, libel can claim no talismanic immunity…