Skip to main content

Exit WCAG Theme

Switch to Non-ADA Website

Accessibility Options

Select Text Sizes

Select Text Color

Website Accessibility Information Close Options
Close Menu

Man Arrested At Orlando Airport For Putting Police Officer In Chokehold


According to a report from Fox 35 Orlando, a man from Ohio was placed under arrest after putting an officer of the Orlando Police Department in a chokehold while at the Orlando International Airport. A video of the incident has been released to the public. Edward Hariston, 41, is facing several serious criminal charges, including attempted first degree murder and battery on a law enforcement officer. Within this blog post, our Orlando criminal defense attorney provides a more detailed account of the incident and discusses the charges that have been filed in this case.

Man Faces Very Serious Charges After Confrontation With Officer Near Spirit Ticket Counter 

Edward Hariston, 41, from Ohio, was apprehended at Orlando International Airport, Florida, after engaging in a physical altercation with an Orlando Police Department officer. Mr. Hariston was part of a larger group reportedly causing disruption at the Spirit Airlines ticket counter. The incident escalated when he interfered with the ticketing computer, prompting police intervention. Mr. Hariston allegedly resisted arrest and put an officer in a chokehold, causing airway restriction. He faces charges including attempted first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer, resisting arrest with violence, battery on a law enforcement officer, and disorderly conduct.

Understanding the Criminal Charges Filed in this Case 

As stated previously, the defendant apprehended after the confrontation at the Orlando International Airport is facing four separate criminal charges. They vary widely in their severity. Here is an overview of the charges filed in this case:

  • Attempted First-Degree Murder: The defendant stands accused of taking deliberate action with the intent to kill a law enforcement officer. It is considered attempted as the act was not completed, though, as charged, there was a clear intent. In this case, Mr. Hariston allegedly applied a chokehold that restricted the officer’s airway, which is a potentially lethal act.
  • Resisting Arrest with Violence: This charge is applicable when an individual resists, obstructs, or opposes a law enforcement officer with violence or threats during an arrest. In the given scenario, Mr. Hariston is accused of physically grappling with the officer, which impeded the arrest process.
  • Battery on a Law Enforcement Officer: This refers to intentionally touching or striking a law enforcement officer against their will or causing bodily harm. Mr. Hariston reportedly engaged in physical contact with the officer, and put him in a chokehold, which amounts to battery.
  • Disorderly Conduct: Disorderly conduct encompasses a range of behaviors that are likely to cause a disturbance or jeopardize the safety and well-being of the public or property. In Mr. Hariston’s case, he was part of an unruly crowd that was aggressive towards airline staff and created a disruptive environment. 

As with any person charged with a crime in Central Florida, the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. 

Get Help From a Top Orlando, FL Criminal Defense Lawyer Today

At The Baez Law Firm, our Orlando criminal defense attorney provides aggressive, justice-focused advocacy for clients. With experience handling felony and misdemeanor cases, we invest the times and resources needed to get our clients the best possible outcome. Contact us today for your fully confidential, no commitment initial consultation. From our Orlando law office, we serve clients all across Central Florida.


By submitting this form I acknowledge that form submissions via this website do not create an attorney-client relationship, and any information I send is not protected by attorney-client privilege.

DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Skip footer and go back to main navigation