On August 14, 2025, Devon Hogan Flanagan, a special assistant attorney general in Rhode Island, was detained for trespassing at the Clarke Cooke House restaurant in Newport. The arrest, captured by Newport Police Department bodycam footage, gained attention after a video showed Flanagan, 34, confronting officers, demanding they turn off their cameras, and repeatedly stating she was an “AG” (short for assistant attorney general). Accompanied by her friend Veronica Hannan, also arrested, Flanagan faced charges of willful trespass after refusing to leave the premises as requested by the restaurant staff. Her threats to officers, including “You’re going to regret this,” sparked debate about professional conduct and are under review by the office of Attorney General Peter Neronha. The viral case raises questions about the use of authority in personal situations.
The police operation took place around 9:51 p.m. when officers responded to a call about “unwanted patrons” at the Clarke Cooke House on Bannister’s Wharf. Flanagan, who has worked for seven years in the criminal appeals unit of the attorney general’s office, was approached alongside Hannan, 34, who was also charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. The situation escalated due to their refusal to leave despite multiple warnings from officers.
- Reason for the call: Restaurant staff requested the removal of Flanagan and Hannan.
- Initial reaction: Flanagan demanded the bodycams be turned off, citing protocol.
- Outcome: Both were handcuffed after failing to comply with orders to leave.
The arrest video, released by Newport police on August 18, shows the prosecutor questioning the officers’ authority and leveraging her position to avoid detention. Flanagan’s conduct drew public and internal criticism, with Attorney General Neronha calling her behavior “unacceptable.”
Details of the restaurant confrontation
The incident at Clarke Cooke House began with a call from management reporting patrons who refused to leave. According to police reports, Hannan, Flanagan’s friend, was initially identified as intoxicated, which may have contributed to the escalation. When officers arrived, Flanagan immediately demanded they turn off their bodycams, citing a supposed protocol requiring deactivation upon a citizen’s request.
One officer, visibly frustrated, responded that the claim was “absurd” and that Newport’s bodycam policy only allows deactivation in specific cases, such as to protect victims’ or witnesses’ privacy, not suspects. Flanagan persisted, repeatedly stating “I’m an AG” while being handcuffed. Hannan also reacted aggressively, slipping out of her handcuffs at one point and using her feet to prevent the police car door from closing.
- Flanagan’s demand: Insisted bodycams be turned off, claiming it was a right.
- Police response: Officer denied the request, stating the rule didn’t apply.
- Hannan’s behavior: Physically resisted, complicating the arrest.
- Outcome: Both faced formal charges, with Hannan receiving additional counts.
The incident was fully documented by bodycams, capturing the heated exchange between the women and officers. The footage, widely shared on social media, intensified scrutiny of Flanagan’s conduct, particularly her attempt to use her position to influence the officers.
Attorney General’s response and internal review
The Rhode Island Attorney General’s Office, led by Peter Neronha, announced an immediate review of the case following the arrest on August 14. In a local radio interview, Neronha described Flanagan’s behavior as “unacceptable” and noted that the prosecutor, who handles appeals in the state’s Supreme Court, should have been aware of the consequences of her actions. He also mentioned that Flanagan watched the arrest footage and was advised to reflect on how to “rectify” the situation.
Neronha suggested that, if Flanagan remains in her role, she faces a suspension without pay. He emphasized the challenge of retaining qualified attorneys but stressed that a “strong sanction” would be applied. The attorney general also praised the Newport police for not yielding to Flanagan’s attempts to use her position to avoid arrest.
- Neronha’s statement: Flanagan’s behavior was “unacceptable” and “embarrassing.”
- Disciplinary measures: Suspension without pay is under consideration.
- Praise for police: Newport was commended for impartial conduct.
The internal review, expected to conclude within days of the incident, examines not only Flanagan’s conduct but also the impact of her actions on the attorney general’s office reputation, which employs about 110 attorneys. The situation is delicate, as Flanagan is a mother whose children are likely to see the viral footage.
Legal implications and formal charges
Flanagan was charged with willful trespass, a misdemeanor, resulting in a summons to appear in court. Hannan faces more severe charges, including disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, and willful trespass. She was taken to court for an initial hearing, while Flanagan received only a summons.
Newport’s bodycam policy was a key issue in the case. Contrary to Flanagan’s claims, state protocol does not require officers to turn off cameras at a citizen’s request, especially in confrontational situations. Flanagan’s insistence on this point was seen as an attempt to intimidate officers, worsening the perception of her conduct.
- Charges against Flanagan: Willful trespass, with a court summons.
- Charges against Hannan: Trespass, disorderly conduct, and resisting arrest.
- Bodycam policy: Only victims or witnesses can request deactivation.
- Case impact: Flanagan’s use of her position may influence disciplinary review.
Flanagan’s lack of comment, responding “no comment” to media inquiries, suggests she is awaiting the internal review’s outcome before speaking publicly.
Flanagan’s professional background
Devon Hogan Flanagan, also identified as Devon Hogan in some police records, has worked for about seven years in the Rhode Island Attorney General’s Office. In the criminal appeals unit, she handles cases before the state Supreme Court, earning an annual salary of approximately $113,000. Her professional experience contrasted sharply with her conduct during the incident, drawing criticism from colleagues and the public.
Hannan, meanwhile, is a product management and transformation strategy professional with experience in advertising technology and data analytics. A resident of Westport, Connecticut, she is a mother of three and a graduate of the Catholic University of America. Her physical resistance during the arrest, including slipping out of handcuffs, added complexity to the case.
- Flanagan’s career: Seven years in the criminal appeals unit.
- Salary: Approximately $113,000 per year.
- Hannan’s profile: Technology specialist with consulting experience.
- Personal context: Both are longtime friends, formerly residents of Washington, D.C.
The case highlighted not only issues of professional conduct but also the impact of personal actions on the reputation of public institutions, especially when captured on video.
Public reaction and institutional challenges
The release of the arrest video sparked widespread attention on social media, with users criticizing Flanagan’s attempt to use her position to avoid consequences. The phrase “You’re going to regret this” featured prominently in headlines, reinforcing the narrative of attempted abuse of authority. Newport police were praised for maintaining impartiality despite Flanagan’s intimidation attempts.
The case also reignited discussions about the importance of bodycams in ensuring police transparency. The officers’ refusal to turn off their cameras was seen as a proper application of recording policies, which prioritize documenting interactions with suspects.
- Social media reaction: Criticism of Flanagan’s conduct and support for police.
- Bodycam importance: Footage reinforces transparency in sensitive cases.
- Public debate: Use of public office in personal situations sparks controversy.
The attorney general’s office now faces the challenge of addressing public pressure while conducting its internal review. The decision regarding Flanagan’s future in her role will be closely watched, particularly for its impact on the institution’s credibility.
