Human teeth qualify as a deadly weapon in the District of Columbia, an appeals court affirmed last week.
A person’s choppers joins a list of everyday objects that D.C. law considers deadly when used during an attack: a wooden table leg, a belt, an automobile and a shoed foot.
Recommended Stories
Not deadly: Stationary bathroom fixtures and flip-flop sandals.
The D.C. Court of Appeals ruling stems from a 2005 arrest of a juvenile in Southeast Washington in which the teenager bit a police officer in the groin. Responding to a call of shots fired near the D.C. Alternative Learning Academy, D.C. police Officer Anthony Convington spotted a teenager who matched the description of the suspect and wrestled him to the ground. While Convington tried to handcuff the teenager, the suspect lunged forward and bit Convington in his upper inner right thigh, leaving teeth marks and a bleeding wound.
Convington required a week off and a six-month course of anti-viral and HIV drugs. The teenager was convicted of assaulting a police officer using a deadly weapon and sentenced to juvenile detention for an indeterminate period not to exceed his 21st birthday.
To consider whether human teeth were a weapon, the court looked at legal precedent, Webster’s dictionary and the combat manual used by the U.S. Marines, which explained: “[T]eeth, in spite of any mental qualms as to their use, are very effective weapons. The jaw muscles can exert terrific pressure and a deep bite to almost any tender or exposed area will effect a release or cause an opponent to cease offensive action.”
The appeals judges rejected the defense’s argument that their ruling will create “absurdities” and encourage police to charge any defendant with possession of a deadly weapon simply because he might be walking around with a nice set of molars and incisors.
“Just as a burglar is not guilty of burglary ‘while armed’ merely because he enters the dwelling with shod feet, neither does the burglar commit the crime ‘while armed’ because she possesses teeth during the break-in,” Judge Frank Q. Nebeker wrote.
Although Convington did not actually suffer a serious injury, the teenager used his teeth in a manner likely to cause great bodily harm, the court said.
