R.I. Senate Votes to Make Disarming Police Officers a Felony
What to know
- The Rhode Island Senate voted 34–3 to approve legislation elevating the act of disarming a police officer or attorney general investigator from a misdemeanor to a felony offense.
- The bill was prompted by a 2023 Newport incident in which a woman attempted to take officers’ firearms during a waterfront fight, an act currently prosecuted under lesser charges.
- Opponents warned that the bill’s mandatory minimum prison sentence and broad definition of “peace officer” could reduce judicial discretion and expand felony exposure.
The Rhode Island Senate on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved legislation that would make trying to disarm a police officer or an attorney general investigator a felony offense.
The measure, which passed by a 34–3 vote, would replace the state’s current misdemeanor classification for removing or attempting to remove an officer’s weapon, the Rhode Island Current reports. The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Lou DiPalma, said the change was driven by a September 2023 brawl in Newport that resulted in multiple arrests, including a woman captured on video attempting to seize firearms from two responding officers near Bowen’s Wharf.
During that encounter, one officer struck the woman, knocking her unconscious before she was taken into custody and charged with several crimes, including two counts of larceny from a person related to the attempted weapon seizure. She later pleaded no contest in May 2025.
Although larceny from a person carries a potential prison sentence of up to 10 years, court records show the defendant received three years of home confinement, with two years suspended and five years of probation. Under the proposed law, attempting to remove a firearm or communication device from a peace officer or attorney general investigator would carry a mandatory minimum sentence of one year in prison, with a maximum penalty of five years.
That sentencing provision drew opposition from the state Office of the Public Defender, which submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee ahead of the bill’s April 2 hearing. The office also objected to treating the removal of electronic communication equipment as equivalent to disarming an officer of a firearm.
But law enforcement leaders countered that interference with an officer’s ability to communicate can rapidly escalate encounters and endanger everyone involved.
“Establishing a clear felony penalty for this conduct sends an important message that such behavior will not be tolerated,” Cranston Police Chief Col. Michael J. Winquist wrote in a letter supporting the bill.
Similar legislation sponsored by DiPalma passed the Senate last year but stalled in the House due to the absence of a companion bill. A matching proposal introduced this session by Rep. Earl Read, has yet to receive a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee.