Is battery upon a police officer a crime of moral turpitude?

Respondent cites this court's decision in People v. Lindsay (1989) 209 Cal.App.3d 849, 257 Cal.Rptr. 529, holding that battery upon a police officer ( 243, subd. (c)) is a crime of moral turpitude. That crime, however, requires both an affirmative act (use of force) and a mental state (actual or constructive knowledge that the victim is a peace officer in the performance of his or her duties) from which a readiness to do evil can be inferred. (209 Cal.App.3d at p. 857, 257 Cal.Rptr. 529.) Neither element is necessary for a conviction under section 273a, subdivision (1).

Other offenses which have recently been found to involve moral turpitude are similarly distinguishable from child endangerment. Shooting into an inhabited dwelling ( 246) requires active conduct engaged in with malice. (People v. White (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 1299, 6 Cal.Rptr.2d 259.) Inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or cohabitant ( 273.5) requires use of force resulting in a traumatic condition. (People v. Rodriguez (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1398, 7 Cal.Rptr.2d 495.)