Proof of Either Unreasonable Force or Cruel Discipline Satisfies Malicious Punishment Statute

State v. Broten, Minn.Ct.App., 9/3/2013.  S.C.C.,age twelve, got a bad grade at school.  Ms. Broten thought the appropriate parental response was to shear S.C.C.’s head and make her go outside wearing a tank top and a diaper.  Between thirty and fifty neighbors didn’t agree with this approach to improving educational achievement and called the cops.  The state prosecuted Ms. Broten for malicious punishment of a child.  She maintained that the statute required proof of bodily harm.  Here’s what the statute says:

A parent … who, by an intentional act or series of intentional acts with respect to a child, evidences unreasonable force or cruel discipline that is excessive under the circumstances is guilty of malicious punishment of a child. …”  Minn.Stat. 609.377, subdivision 1. 

The offense is a gross misdemeanor if the punishment results in “less than substantial bodily harm.”  Ms. Broten makes numerous interpretation arguments to support the claim that the statute requires bodily harm, but the court of appeals points out that the language of the statute is written in the disjunctive:  unreasonable force or cruel discipline.  Enough said.

The court also concludes that the statute is not void for vagueness as applied to these facts.