What defenses exist for resisting detention by private security in Georgia?
Where a person is alleged to have resisted detention by private security personnel in Georgia, the analysis differs from resisting a law enforcement officer, because private security generally does not have the same authority. Defending such a matter centers on the authority of the personnel and the circumstances.
The authority of private security is examined. Private security personnel generally do not have the same authority as law enforcement officers, so whether they had any lawful basis to detain a person can be significant. The extent of their authority is weighed carefully in the analysis.
In practice, the nature of the charge matters. Conduct involving private security may be addressed under general offenses rather than statutes specific to obstructing officers, so the actual charge and its elements can be central. Which offense is alleged shapes the analysis.
The circumstances of the encounter are examined. What occurred during the encounter, including the conduct of both the person and the security personnel, can bear on the matter. The sequence of events and the reasonableness of the conduct are examined.
Defending a matter involving resisting private security generally focuses on the authority of the personnel, the specific charge alleged, and the circumstances of the encounter. The limits of private security authority, the nature of the offense, and what actually occurred are the considerations on which such a defense rests. Since private guards lack an officer’s authority, whether they had any lawful basis to hold the person at all often frames the entire matter.