{"id":7318,"date":"2023-10-26T16:14:51","date_gmt":"2023-10-26T16:14:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/portal.bluetogold.com\/?p=7318"},"modified":"2026-09-17T07:04:46","modified_gmt":"2026-09-17T14:04:46","slug":"detention-for-criminal-trespass","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/portal.bluetogold.com\/?p=7318","title":{"rendered":"Detention for Criminal Trespass"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here is our next question:\u00a0 Can police detain someone to issue a criminal trespass warning if they leave the location after being warned?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I’ll explain what’s kind of going on here.\u00a0 This officer is in Texas.\u00a0 He asks:\u00a0 If a business owner or homeowner has told a subject to leave their property, and that subject complied with their request to leave immediately, can the owner still get them criminally trespassed?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Are we allowed under the Fourth Amendment to stop the subject subject, identify them and issue that criminal trespass warning?\u00a0 Would the answer change if they didn’t comply the first time they were asked?<\/p>\n

Can you detain someone who already left after being told to leave?<\/h2>\n

Now, sometimes the answer depends on state criminal law.\u00a0 Constitutionally, I think the best answer is, if the person has complied with the order to leave the property, don’t detain them.<\/p>\n

You, as a law enforcement officer, are allowed to detain people under two conditions: One, with reasonable suspicion<\/a> and Two, with probable cause<\/a>.<\/p>\n

You don’t have probable cause here, because the person immediately complied.\u00a0 They left, as they are supposed to.\u00a0 And you don’t have reasonable suspicion here, because you don’t have any facts or circumstances that would lead a reasonable police officer to believe that criminal activity is afoot. So why would you detain them?<\/p>\n

Can you try to engage in a consensual encounter<\/a>?\u00a0 Yes. \u00a0But why wouldn’t they come back?\u00a0 And how do we prove that?\u00a0 Let the landowner prove that, if maybe they got video, maybe they took a picture.<\/p>\n

You can’t get involved and use your police power for this issue.\u00a0 In my view, it’s not a police issue.\u00a0 If the guy comes back, let that landowner explain to the police how this person has already previously trespassed, and what proof they have.\u00a0 That’s on them.<\/p>\n

What if the person refuses to leave after the warning?<\/h2>\n

Now, I think it does change if the person actually did violate the law, in the sense of \u201cI’m staying here.\u201d\u00a0 And then, finally, the landlord\u2019s saying, \u201cWell, I’m calling the cops.\u201d<\/p>\n

There’s a fair probability based on the facts and circumstances that you know, at this time, that they have violated the law if they did not leave and they committed some form of criminal trespassing.\u00a0 Do I believe that you can stop them and potentially identify them?\u00a0 The answer is, \u201cyes,\u201d because these criminal trespass laws do not require that the that the victim wants to prosecute.<\/p>\n

If you look at these these trespass laws, they normally say something like, \u201cAfter a sufficient warning, if the person refuses to leave the property, that equals a criminal trespass.\u201d That’s what it says.\u00a0 It does not say, \u201cand you have to have a landowner willing to press charges.\u201d<\/p>\n

Now, in reality, if you do not have a landowner willing to participate and cooperate and press charges, then cops usually don’t take any enforcement action.\u00a0 Even if they did, the prosecutor is probably going to throw out the charges because they need a witness.<\/p>\n

Should you get involved if the landowner does not want to press charges?<\/h2>\n

That’s a different issue.\u00a0 Remember to separate those two out.\u00a0 We are talking about what happens on the street versus what happens in court.<\/p>\n

What happens on the street, if you have probable cause that the person violated the law, is you are allowed to conduct an investigation. So if you want to stop them, then stop them.<\/p>\n

Now let’s talk about my (Anthony\u2019s) best practice. If you have a landowner saying, \u201cI don’t want to press charges, I just want them identified and so forth,\u201d I would not get involved.\u00a0 I’m sorry, but I just would not get involved. \u00a0It’s not worth it to me with these very minor cases.<\/p>\n

I’m not saying I wouldn’t try to have a consensual encounter with the person as in; \u201cHey, can I talk to you for a second?\u201d\u00a0 But if the guy says to pound sand, why am I putting my badge on the line here for this landowner who doesn’t want to press charges?\u00a0 You feel what I’m saying\u00a0 here, right?<\/p>\n

Is it worth putting hands on someone just to get their name?<\/h2>\n

Do I want to put my badge on the line here, use force on this guy, put some hands on him all because some landowner just wants his information?\u00a0 No, I’m not Pinkerton. I’m not a private security force.\u00a0 I’m a police officer, right?\u00a0 I’m not putting hands on people just because someone wants this guy’s name.\u00a0 That’s what I would do; I would let him go.<\/p>\n

Alright, I hope it helps move the ball forward.\u00a0 Use good judgment.\u00a0 That’s my mantra here, and that’s my motto.\u00a0 My mantra is, \u201cLet’s make good case law.\u201d\u00a0 Let’s not give courts any extra reason to not support what we’re doing out there.\u00a0 Use good judgment.\u00a0 That’s for a guy committing a serious crime and so forth. That’s totally different.<\/p>\n

Alright.\u00a0 This officer says, \u201cI appreciate all you do.\u00a0 Great stuff!\u00a0 It really helps educate us and helps us remain constitutional.\u201d\u00a0 And I thank you for that feedback. Before you leave, share with your friends,\u00a0 I appreciate it.\u00a0 Try to get this forum used by as many cops as possible. Until next time, my friends stay safe.<\/p>\n

Related from Blue to Gold<\/h2>\n