• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Wrongfully charged trespass

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Confusedinar42

New member
I know of someone who was charged with criminal trespassing. They were incorrectly identified by a sheriffs deputy who never actually made contact with the suspect only said it was him from a distance. The prosecutors office has been given a statement by the person that did trespass. The person originally charged has gone to court and was told was given a list of rules to follow and was told if they followed that list and had no problems the trespass charge would be dropped in 6 months. How can someone be wrongfully charged and the charges not get dropped but instead they have more restrictions put on them?
 


FlyingRon

Senior Member
Someone needed an attorney. Perhaps they had one, but you seem to be missing a lot of details.

By the way, there's very good reason why the forum asks the name fo the state that you decided to delete without answering.

To file charges just needs probable cause. "Making contact" with a suspect isn't a requirement for anything. Just because someone else CLAIMS they were guilty, doesn't mean that the prosecution of the probable suspect can't proceed.

The person was "given rules" only after he agreed to the diversion or pleaded or was found guilty. He had the opportunity to face trial if he wanted to do so.
 
Last edited:

Confusedinar42

New member
Someone needed an attorney. Perhaps they had one, but you seem to be missing a lot of details.

By the way, there's very good reason why the forum asks the name fo the state that you decided to delete without answering.

To file charges just needs probable cause. "Making contact" with a suspect isn't a requirement for anything. Just because someone else CLAIMS they were guilty, doesn't mean that the prosecution of the probable suspect can't proceed.

The person was "given rules" only after he agreed to the diversion or pleaded or was found guilty. He had the opportunity to face trial if he wanted to do so.
This happened in Arkansas. He is trying to go to trial. All he has done has entered a plea and gone to court once and was given a new date. He hasn’t been found guilty. Wouldn’t the prosecutor have to bring up in court that someone else has taken the blame? How can you say someone broke a no trespass order without actually identifying them first? Would that set you up for a lawsuit? False arrest?
 

FlyingRon

Senior Member
You do not need to have previously trespassed to have a trespass order issued against you. A property owner is free to bar anybody he wants for any reason (other than a few protected things like race, etc....). Arkansas is one of the states where it's not even required that notice be given, though trespassing in face of the notice increases the penalty. In addition, it makes it clear that the person is not an welcome entrant to the property.

Understand, that while a confession is enough to convict YOU, it's not enough to prove that the other person isn't guilty himself of the crime. If it were, all it would take is a high-level criminal under indictment to incentivise someone to confess for him to get off, for example.

Again, there are details missing here. What "plea" did he enter? What are these conditions? Are they part of a pretrial intervention? Are they just conditions of his pretrial release?

Anyhow, it makes little difference. The best thing you can do for him is to make sure he gets an attorney (public defender, if he qualifies) or otherwise. Make sure the attorney knows the details of the crime (that you are the criminal). In fact, you'd be well advised to get an attorney yourself, before you go further incriminating yourself.
 

CavemanLawyer

Senior Member
The answer is that you apparently know the truth but so far the prosecutor is skeptical of it. I can't tell you how many times I have seen someone file an affidavit in a criminal case falsely taking the blame for the alleged act because the consequences would be less severe for them then the person charged. Its easy to claim the gun was yours if you aren't a felon, or that the drugs are all yours, and not your codefendants, if you already got probation for it, etc... In this case it sounds like you are admitting you were the person on the property but that (you believe) no crime occurred because you did not have a trespass warning against you. Surely you can understand why a prosecutor might be skeptical of this, at least at first? The other person that is currently charged could literally get anyone in the world to claim it was actually them on the property to get the case dismissed. Bottom line, the facts are only cut and dry to the people who experienced the event themselves.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top