Resisting vehicle detention due to alcohol violation, sentenced to 12 months in prison

On the afternoon of January 30, the People's Court of District 4 (HCMC) held a first-instance trial under simplified procedures, sentencing defendant Ngo Van Lao (43 years old, residing in Tra Vinh province) to 12 months in prison for resisting a person on official duty under Clause 1, Article 330 of the Penal Code. The defendant violated alcohol concentration, then resisted the traffic police when they asked to temporarily detain his vehicle.

TP.HCM: Chống cự khi tạm giữ xe do vi phạm nồng độ cồn, lãnh 12 tháng tù- Ảnh 1. — Defendant Ngo Van Lao

According to the indictment, on the night of December 29, 2023, the Traffic Control Patrol Team of District 4 Police, Ho Chi Minh City suspected that Ngo Van Lao, driving a motorbike carrying Vu Sy Tien, had consumed alcohol, so they stopped the vehicle to check his alcohol concentration.

The alcohol concentration test result for Laos was 0.917 mg/liter, so the traffic police asked Laos to bring the car to the area of Major Vo Hoang Nam and Major To Hong Quang to work and make a record.

After completing the report, Major Nam asked Lao to check the trunk of the car to get the property to seal and temporarily impound the vehicle. Lao did not comply, and at the same time argued, rushed in, grabbed Major Nam by the collar, and used his hand to hit Major Nam in the face.

Then, the police controlled Ngo Van Lao and brought him to the police station in Ward 2, District 4 to make a record and arrest him.

In court today, Laos admitted to the crime as charged in the indictment.

According to the panel of judges, the defendant used force to obstruct people on duty, causing disorder in social security, so he should be severely punished. However, during the investigation and public trial in court, the defendant confessed honestly, repented, and committed a crime for the first time, so the panel of judges imposed the above sentence.

Regarding the act of beating Major Vo Hoang Nam, the victim only suffered minor injuries, did not request compensation, did not request treatment for the defendant, so the panel of judges did not consider it.