Law Review: Park Trespass Policy Unconstitutional

By Kozlowski, James C. | Parks & Recreation, February 2007 | Go to article overview

Law Review: Park Trespass Policy Unconstitutional


Kozlowski, James C., Parks & Recreation


The policy must meet the standards of substantive due process.

Tn the case of Anthony v. State, No. 06-05-00133-CR. (Tex.App. 6th Dist. 2006), plaintiff Lamar Anthony, Jr. was convicted of criminal trespass in a city park. The City of Henderson, Texas, had an unwritten policy delegating the authority and discretion to its police officers to ban persons from public parks.

Facts of the Case

After receiving information that a suspect wanted on felony drug charges, was "in a vehicle that was inside Yates Park," several members of the Henderson Police Department were dispatched to that location. Apparently, at about the same time, Anthony rode with his cousin, Chris Hill, to Yates Park where they intended to play basketball. Officer Amber Tyson detained Hill's vehicle in the parking lot of the park.

Police Sergeant Bryan Pool testified that when he arrived at the scene, Anthony was engaged in a conversation with Tyson and was "being a little loud" and did not appear to be willing to cooperate. Pool testified he turned toward Anthony and explained to him, "This is a city park. I am a representative of the city. Therefore, I have a right to say who comes in this park and who doesn't come in this park."

Pool further testified that, because of his past experience with Anthony, he did not believe Anthony respected authority or understood what he had just said, so he told him more bluntly to leave the park and not to come back, or he'd take Anthony to jail.

Pool testified that, when a person receives what the city describes as a "criminal trespass warning," there is no set time limit for that warning to expire, and it is effective "from now on." Approximately 10 to 15 minutes after Anthony's initial confrontation with Pool, the police department received an anonymous call that the drug suspect was possibly in a truck that was in Yates Park. Police officers were again dispatched to the park.

When Pool arrived in response to the second call, he observed Anthony standing in the entrance to the parking lot of Yates Park. Making good on his earlier promise, Pool then arrested Anthony for failing to heed Pool's earlier directive that Anthony stay out of the park and not come back.

It was the city's unwritten policy to delegate authority to individual officers to issue "criminal trespass" warnings, banning individuals from the park. The city had no written criteria to guide police officers in exercising their authority to issue such warnings. Accordingly, it was left to the discretion of the individual police officer to determine who was banned from a park on a case by case basis.

Anthony was charged with criminal trespass, a misdemeanor offense. After the jury found Anthony guilty, the trial court assessed punishment at 10 days' confinement in the county jail. Anthony appealed.

Due Process Violation?

On appeal, Anthony contended that "the trespass policy of Henderson, on its face, violates the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution." As cited by the appeals court, the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution provides that a state shall not "deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." Further, the appeals court noted that the statute or regulation is presumed to be constitutional. Accordingly, "a party challenging a statute on the basis that the statute violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment bears the burden of demonstrating the scheme's unconstitutionality."

In addressing Anthony's due process challenge to the city's trespass policy, the appeals court would first consider "whether Anthony had a protected liberty or property interest in Yates Park," i.e. substantive due process. Secondly, the court would consider whether the unwritten policy violated procedural due process.

Substantive Due Process

As described by the court, a "substantive due-process analysis" would consider the following: "(1) whether the plaintiff had a protected liberty interest, and (2) if the government deprived him or her of that interest capriciously and arbitrarily. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Law Review: Park Trespass Policy Unconstitutional
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.