We covered this subject beyond deeply in-depth in the thread about an incident at Lynnhaven Mall fairly recently.
I checked with a magistrate. It's a Class I misdemeanor. Maximim penalty is $2500 fine, a year in jail, or both.
Not to argue, but since the title of the thread is about being asked to leave (trespassing) that gave most of us a small clue.metg wrote:I checked with a magistrate. It's a Class I misdemeanor. Maximim penalty is $2500 fine, a year in jail, or both.
What is "it."
Try not to use pronouns on OCDO - leaves the reader hangin'.
Even if the ban was lifted, the court case only argued for having an assembled ready-to-fire handgun in ones house, not out in public.
Why would I need to lie about this event? What purpose would that serve?Reading the original post...and considering the tone of it...leads me to believe that hsmith is a troll. My best judgment tells me that this event never happened. It just appears to be written in a far to juvenile and uneducated manner to be real.
I would be interested to know the legal implications of how the sign is posted, as in if it is something you need to search out, implicit consent to the "terms" of entering the building, ect.Smurfologist wrote:possumboy wrote:
Heh, I'm just the oppsite. I don't look, I just carry. Let them ask me to leave.
I hear you, possumboy! I thought that signs carry no weight in VA, is that not right?!? I was under the impression that you have to be asked to leave, is that not right?!? This is the reason why I don't look for signs. Please correct me if I need to be corrected.
2nd Amendment........Use it.........Or, lose it!!:X
That is my understanding. You have to asked to leave because they cannot prove you stood there and read all the small print.
I know in some states, they have requirements for posting -sizing and shape- and those signs do carry the weight of law. In VA, the signs mean nothing, but being asked to leave does.
Also, it is a criminal trespass charge, and not a gun charge if you refuse to leave. I've been meaning to look up criminal trespass to see what class it is and the pentalities for violation. Anyone have the code available?
That is my understanding. You have to asked to leave because they cannot prove you stood there and read all the small print.
I know in some states, they have requirements for posting -sizing and shape- and those signs do carry the weight of law. In VA, the signs mean nothing, but being asked to leave does.
Also, it is a criminal trespass charge, and not a gun charge if you refuse to leave. I've been meaning to look up criminal trespass to see what class it is and the penalties for violation. Anyone have the code available?
I have been to many calls where the person refused to leave till I arrived. Then they knew it was time to go. The LEO cannot charge you unless he observed you being told to leave or a letter was already on file that you signed for.
Anyone with authority over the property can send a letter "registered with return receipt" to a person they want to ban from their properly... private or commercial. They keep a copy of the letter along with the signed receipt card showing the person received it.
Once the officer arrives and sees the person on the property and a notice had been given.... theperson gets a summons. There are other circumstances were the officer may arrest and remove the person if necessary.
In absence of the letter... if you are told not to return in front of the officer and you do so....when the officer sees you on the property he can issue you a summons having first hand knowledge.
If you leave before he police get there and you received the ban letter...the mall manager will need torequest a warrant of arrest from the magistrate. The officer then visits you at your home to issue a summons to appear in court.
LEO 229 wrote:Anyone with authority over the property can send a letter "registered with return receipt" to a person they want to ban from their properly... private or commercial. They keep a copy of the letter along with the signed receipt card showing the person received it.
Once the officer arrives and sees the person on the property and a notice had been given.... theperson gets a summons. There are other circumstances were the officer may arrest and remove the person if necessary.
In absence of the letter... if you are told not to return in front of the officer and you do so....when the officer sees you on the property he can issue you a summons having first hand knowledge.
If you leave before he police get there and you received the ban letter...the mall manager will need torequest a warrant of arrest from the magistrate. The officer then visits you at your home to issue a summons to appear in court.
I suspected the possibility.
Metg? Can you confirm this with your magistrate contact?
Can you also confirm the letter or other proof requirement?I'm wondering if an oath or affirmation is maybe all that's really required.Does areceipted letterjust move it out of the realm of "his word against the other guy's word?" It might increase the likelyhood of conviction; but, that's different than whether its literally necessary to get the summons.
Personally, I don't plan on violating any signs.Knowing the risks might help others who aren't quite convinced.
Citizen wrote:LEO 229 wrote:Anyone with authority over the property can send a letter "registered with return receipt" to a person they want to ban from their properly... private or commercial. They keep a copy of the letter along with the signed receipt card showing the person received it.
Once the officer arrives and sees the person on the property and a notice had been given.... theperson gets a summons. There are other circumstances were the officer may arrest and remove the person if necessary.
In absence of the letter... if you are told not to return in front of the officer and you do so....when the officer sees you on the property he can issue you a summons having first hand knowledge.
If you leave before he police get there and you received the ban letter...the mall manager will need torequest a warrant of arrest from the magistrate. The officer then visits you at your home to issue a summons to appear in court.
I suspected the possibility.
Metg? Can you confirm this with your magistrate contact?
Can you also confirm the letter or other proof requirement?I'm wondering if an oath or affirmation is maybe all that's really required.Does areceipted letterjust move it out of the realm of "his word against the other guy's word?" It might increase the likelyhood of conviction; but, that's different than whether its literally necessary to get the summons.
Personally, I don't plan on violating any signs.Knowing the risks might help others who aren't quite convinced.
Citizen, LEO 229 is completely correct.
I checked with my magistrate contact and learned this: A letter or other proof requirement is not mandatory. The person with authority over the property must first notifysomeone that they are forbidded (banned)from entering the property. This can be done in person, via phone call, letter, etc. If that person then comes onto the property, the person with authority may visit the magistrate, complete a criminal complaint, and swearthe circumstances under oathto the magistrate. This would apply to commercial and/or private property.