Assault with Significant Bodily Injury (“Felony Assault”) in D.C.

It is a criminal offense in Washington, D.C. to inflict significant bodily injury on another person. The offense is punishable by up to 3 years and/or a maximum fine of $12,500.  D.C. Code § 22-404(a)(2)

Also known as “felony assault,” this offense fills the gap between aggravated assault, which requires the government to prove “serious bodily injury,” and simple assault, which does not require any bodily injury at all.  According to the D.C. Council Committee Report that accompanied the felony assault statute, the purpose of the new offense was “to provide a penalty for assault that results in ‘significant (but not grave) bodily injury.’”

There are two ways for the government to prove felony assault.

In order to prove “battery assault” as a felony offense, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the defense injured another person through the use of force or violence, (2) the defendant did so voluntarily, on purpose, and not by mistake or accident, (3) the injury caused by the defendant was “significant bodily injury,” and (4) the defendant either intended to cause significant bodily injury, knew that significant bodily injury would result from his/her conduct, or was aware of and disregarded the risk of significant bodily injury that his/her conduct created.

Alternatively, through “intent-to-frighten” assault, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the defendant committed a threatening act that reasonably would create in another person a fear of immediate injury, (2) the defendant did so voluntarily, on purpose, and not by mistake or accident, (3) the defendant had the apparent ability at the time of the conduct to injure the person, (4) the defendant’s threatening act caused the injury, and (5) the defendant either intended to cause significant bodily injury, knew that significant bodily injury would result from his/her conduct, or was aware of and disregarded the risk of significant bodily injury that his/her conduct created.

“Significant bodily injury” is defined as an injury that requires hospitalization or immediate medical attention.  The fact that an individual did or did not seek immediate medical attention, was or was not transported by ambulance to a hospital, or did or did not receive treatment at a hospital is not determinative of whether hospitalization or immediate medical attention was required.  The court must instead consider the nature of the alleged injury itself.

The D.C. Court of Appeals previously interpreted the term “significant bodily injury” in its 2010 opinion, In re R.S., 6 A.3d 854 (D.C. 2010): “The threshold for significant bodily injury is markedly less severe than that required for aggravated assault.”  Bodily injury will be considered “significant” whenever “the nature of the injury itself” would lead to “the practical need in the ordinary course of events for prompt medical attention.”

More recently, the court held in Quintanilla v. United States, 62 A.3d 1261 (D.C. 2013), that it is not “determinative” whether or not the injured party immediately goes to a hospital or seeks other medical attention.  The question instead is whether or not the jury could have concluded that the complainant should have sought immediate medical attention to prevent “long-term physical damage” and “other potentially permanent injuries – or at least abating pain that is ‘severe’.”  

Last updated:  February 24, 2024