CAN PRIOR PERMISSION TO ENTER PREMISES BE USED AS AUTHORIZATION FOR SUBSEQUENT ENTRANCES AFTER BEING TOLD TO LEAVE?
In general, no, prior permission to enter premises cannot be used as blanket authorization for subsequent entrances after being explicitly told to leave. Once someone is instructed to leave the premises by the owner or an authorized individual, any subsequent entry without renewed permission can be considered criminal trespass. Prior permission does not override a clear directive to leave or stay away from the property.
The case of State v. Jackson, 227 P.3d 1010 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011), helps clarify the legal boundaries of permission to enter premises and subsequent actions after being told to leave.
Facts of State v. Jackson
In State v. Jackson, the defendant, Jackson, was convicted of multiple charges, including criminal trespass. Jackson had lived with his girlfriend, Graham, for three years, but on July 4, 2007, he moved out after being told by a law enforcement officer not to return. On August 13, 2007, Graham allowed Jackson back into her apartment. However, following an argument the next day, August 14, 2007, Jackson was told to leave the premises. Despite this, Jackson returned to the apartment multiple times after the argument and was eventually arrested on August 16, 2007, on Graham’s front porch.
Jackson challenged his conviction for criminal trespass, arguing that Graham had given him permission to enter the premises before, and there was insufficient evidence that this permission had been revoked.
The Court’s Analysis: Authorization and Revocation
The key issue in this case was whether prior permission to enter the premises (before August 14, 2007) could be used as authorization for Jackson’s subsequent entrances after he had been explicitly told to leave.
Criminal Trespass Requirements:
To prove criminal trespass, the State had to show that:Jackson had been told to leave the property by Graham or an authorized person.
Jackson intentionally entered or remained on the property without authority.
Revocation of Permission:
The court found that Jackson’s prior permission to enter the premises (on August 13, 2007, before the fight) was not sufficient to establish authorization to return after the fight on August 14, 2007. Once Graham told Jackson to leave, any previous permission was revoked. Jackson argued that Graham had made statements indicating that he was always welcome, but the court noted that verbal permission prior to the conflict was irrelevant after Jackson was explicitly told to stay away.Evidence of Revocation:
The court reviewed evidence presented by the State, including the testimony of police officers who responded to the home after the argument. The officers testified that Graham appeared frightened after the fight and expressed concern that Jackson was nearby. One officer even testified that Graham refused to come to the door while Jackson was present. This was sufficient evidence for the court to find that Graham had revoked Jackson’s authority to return to her property.
Court Ruling: Affirmation of Criminal Trespass Conviction
The Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed Jackson’s conviction for criminal trespass. The court ruled that prior permission to enter the premises could not be used as continuing authorization after being explicitly told to leave. Even though Jackson had been invited back to the premises on August 13, 2007, Graham’s clear directive after the fight on August 14, 2007, superseded any prior permission.
The court also emphasized that Graham’s actions and the testimony from law enforcement officers provided sufficient evidence that Jackson’s authority to enter the premises had been revoked, making his later entries unlawful.
Key Legal Principles from State v. Jackson
Prior Permission Does Not Extend After Revocation:
If an individual has been granted permission to enter premises, that permission can be revoked at any time by the property owner or an authorized person. Once permission is revoked, any subsequent entry without renewed permission can be considered criminal trespass.Explicit Directive to Leave:
If a person is explicitly told to leave the premises, they must comply. Returning to the premises without permission after such a directive is unlawful, regardless of any prior invitation or permission.Sufficiency of Evidence:
Courts will consider both direct and circumstantial evidence to determine whether a person’s authority to be on the property was revoked. In Jackson, testimony from the property owner (Graham) and police officers indicating fear and concern for safety provided sufficient grounds for finding that permission had been revoked.Intentional Entry Without Authority:
For a charge of criminal trespass, the State must prove that the individual intentionally entered or remained on the premises without authority. Prior permission does not negate the requirement to leave once explicitly told to do so.
Conclusion: No Continued Authorization After Being Told to Leave
In conclusion, prior permission to enter premises cannot be used as blanket authorization for subsequent entries after being told to leave. Once permission is revoked, the individual must leave the premises and cannot lawfully return without new authorization. In State v. Jackson, the court held that prior permission did not give Jackson the right to return after he had been told to leave, and his subsequent actions constituted criminal trespass.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Can prior permission to enter a home be revoked?
Yes, permission to enter a home can be revoked at any time by the property owner or someone with authority. Once revoked, the person must leave and cannot return without new permission.What happens if someone re-enters a property after being told to leave?
If someone re-enters a property after being told to leave, they can be charged with criminal trespass, as their presence on the property is no longer authorized.Can verbal permission from the past justify later entries?
No, past verbal permission does not justify later entries after permission has been revoked. Once a person is told to leave, any prior permission becomes irrelevant.What is required to prove criminal trespass?
To prove criminal trespass, the State must show that the person was told to leave the property and that they intentionally entered or remained on the property without authority.Can someone invite a person back onto their property after telling them to leave?
Yes, the property owner can give new permission to someone after telling them to leave. However, absent new permission, the individual has no right to return.