Hiker Arrested in Unicoi Gap

[BlackCloud]

That is an interesting question. I can tell you that the police must obtain a warrant to enter your tent w/o your permission, just like a home.

Some states might have codified this, but I doubt it. Either way, harassment and stalking are still crimes in most places.

[Wolf - 23000]

That is an interesting question. I can tell you that the police must obtain a warrant to enter your tent w/o your permission, just like a home.

Some states might have codified this, but I doubt it. Either way, harassment and stalking are still crimes in most places.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not even sure if the police would need a warrant to enter someone tent when it is on park land. In most cases, the area is not being rented, no exchange of money for services. There are plenty of times when police had to clear out a homeless camp or similar cases. There is possible an injunction but often no warrant for each one of the tents. They were setup and occupied on public property.

I agree with you that harassment and stalking are still crimes but even then, it can get tricky. The AT is an established route that everyone follows one another. There are many hikers who are going to spend the night at the same campsites regardless of if they are just someone enjoying their AT journey or some creep harassing women on the trail. It is hard to say if someone is following another person around when everyone is following the same route.

[Crossbar]

Yep, law enforcement or any government agent would need a warrant to search anywhere a person has a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. Opening up another person's tent by another without the owners permission (unless exigent circumstances) could be considered 'prowling' as long as that person's tent is legally on the property. Keep in mind that a law enforcement officer can not make an arrest based on a misdemeanor charge unless he witnesses that activity. An arrest can be made without witnessing for a felony charge but a victim or witness will have to be willing to charge/report.

[Durwood]

Yep, law enforcement or any government agent would need a warrant to search anywhere a person has a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. Opening up another person's tent by another without the owners permission (unless exigent circumstances) could be considered 'prowling' as long as that person's tent is legally on the property. Keep in mind that a law enforcement officer can not make an arrest based on a misdemeanor charge unless he witnesses that activity. An arrest can be made without witnessing for a felony charge but a victim or witness will have to be willing to charge/report.

This is not true. I can only speak for TX but I know that a Game Warden has right of entry at all times. They have more entry powers than local LE and even State Police. This power was granted generations ago in order for wardens to gain access to parcels of property when land owner is not present. Farm gates and secured land lines can be accessed by officials with no warrant or reason to inspect.

Also, their first move if people are present is to take all weapons. If any law is deemed to be violated those weapons are seized and taken into govt possession.

Those of us that hunt and fish and have recreational properties know that they can come in whenever they want and seize your gear. Best to be friendly with your regional warden and always, always adhere to laws and plain common sense.

This doesnt address the topic of a nut along the trail but wanted to assert that certain authorities have powers that do NOT afford you the expectation of "privacy". I'm sure it varies by state. Warrants don't have to be in place in TX for search and seizure.

[Durwood]

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not even sure if the police would need a warrant to enter someone tent when it is on park land. In most cases, the area is not being rented, no exchange of money for services. There are plenty of times when police had to clear out a homeless camp or similar cases. There is possible an injunction but often no warrant for each one of the tents. They were setup and occupied on public property.

I agree with you that harassment and stalking are still crimes but even then, it can get tricky. The AT is an established route that everyone follows one another. There are many hikers who are going to spend the night at the same campsites regardless of if they are just someone enjoying their AT journey or some creep harassing women on the trail. It is hard to say if someone is following another person around when everyone is following the same route.

It's not hard to know if a person feels unsafe or that their personal space has been invaded. Every human MUST respect that boundary even if they don't agree with it. A persons space is exactly that-THEIR space. I thru'd and didn't find this to be an issue. Of course, there are times that we squish into tight places...especially in bad weather, but a person should always be aware of anothers comfort zone. If one cannot respect this, they're probably selfish, creepy and a person most people avoid.

Dangerous?? Who knows except the folks involved and the PD that picked him up and questioned him. Eerily like Sovereign, Castle and many others that were pulled off trail because of complaints and turned right back out to the trail just to harm someone. It couldn't have been easy for hikers to push for the guy to be removed from the community.

It's a family out there and nobody wanted him as their brother...just saying.

[Crossbar]

... Warrants don't have to be in place in TX for search and seizure.

All I can say is Wow. I thought the 4th Amendment applied to all States.

[Durwood]

All I can say is Wow. I thought the 4th Amendment applied to all States.

Yes sir. I can say that I have never seen this privilege abused. Never. A land owner or lessee just needs to be aware that certain officers of the state don't need paper.

[BlackCloud]

This is not true. I can only speak for TX but I know that a Game Warden has right of entry at all times. They have more entry powers than local LE and even State Police. This power was granted generations ago in order for wardens to gain access to parcels of property when land owner is not present. Farm gates and secured land lines can be accessed by officials with no warrant or reason to inspect.
This doesnt address the topic of a nut along the trail but wanted to assert that certain authorities have powers that do NOT afford you the expectation of "privacy". I'm sure it varies by state. Warrants don't have to be in place in TX for search and seizure.

Oh my. Let's be clear.

I once was in a class with (2) US Forest Service special agents during advanced training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in GA. At lunch I posed this question. They affirmed that LEOs require a warrant to enter a closed tent absent an exception to the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement. We can get into what those exceptions are, but this is the basic rule.

The 4th/A applies to all levels of government; even in TX. There is an enormous difference between an LEO entering open lands and an LEO entering your home. Any LEO may enter open lands for any official purpose. No LEO can just walk into your home or tent absent consent, a warrant, or probable cause under one of the established exceptions to the 4th/A's warrant requirement. Those exceptions are really limited to exigent circumstances.

An LEO may conduct a search or seizure of a person or item absent a warrant if the LEO establishes probable cause that a crime has been, is, or is about to be committed, so long as that search/seizure is in the plain view of the officer. Inside your home or tent is not in plain view. Your front yard is; the inside of your car is, etc.

No agent of the government has "right of entry" into your home or tent. This is why the 4th/A exists.

[Odd Man Out]

Here's a video regarding this issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32ZUWnE82LI

[Coffee]

Seems to me that anyone opening someone else's tent in the dark, unannounced, is taking their life in their hands especially in the south.

[Durwood]

https://huntershield.com/texas-game-...-in-the-field/

[Durwood]

Folks, I'm not trying to start an argument or debate...just speaking from experience. I've been told in no uncertain terms by a warden that he can be where he wants, when he wants. Discretion is a subjective thing.

Not looking for an argument...all peace and love here. Haha.

[Wolf - 23000]

It's not hard to know if a person feels unsafe or that their personal space has been invaded. Every human MUST respect that boundary even if they don't agree with it. A persons space is exactly that-THEIR space. I thru'd and didn't find this to be an issue. Of course, there are times that we squish into tight places...especially in bad weather, but a person should always be aware of anothers comfort zone. If one cannot respect this, they're probably selfish, creepy and a person most people avoid.

Dangerous?? Who knows except the folks involved and the PD that picked him up and questioned him. Eerily like Sovereign, Castle and many others that were pulled off trail because of complaints and turned right back out to the trail just to harm someone. It couldn't have been easy for hikers to push for the guy to be removed from the community.

It's a family out there and nobody wanted him as their brother...just saying.

Durwood, I never said different, but you missed the point. Just because someone feels unsafe or feel their personal space is been invaded, does mean the other person is doing some criminal. I'm not going to defend anyone who actions are just PLAIN inconsiderate and disrespectfully to others but that doesn't mean it is always a crime. Everyone should treat others with respect. Law enforcement has to follow the law on what they can and cannot do when someone is causing a problem on the trail.

There is also a point that no matter how nice and respectful of a person we are, someone is always going to think you are an a$$hole. Years ago, there was a hiker who believe because she arrived too the shelter first, it was first come first server for her to take over the whole shelter. She didn't feel comfortable sharing the shelter with strangers. There was also another man name Wandering Jack, who hiked the trail a number of times but also suffered from tourettes. If you talked with him, he was one of the nicest men you will ever met. He also made a lot of people uncomfortable due to his medical problem. If you hang around the trail world, there are going to be those that take it to far one way or the other.

[Wolf - 23000]

Oh my. Let's be clear.

I once was in a class with (2) US Forest Service special agents during advanced training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in GA. At lunch I posed this question. They affirmed that LEOs require a warrant to enter a closed tent absent an exception to the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement. We can get into what those exceptions are, but this is the basic rule.

The 4th/A applies to all levels of government; even in TX. There is an enormous difference between an LEO entering open lands and an LEO entering your home. Any LEO may enter open lands for any official purpose. No LEO can just walk into your home or tent absent consent, a warrant, or probable cause under one of the established exceptions to the 4th/A's warrant requirement. Those exceptions are really limited to exigent circumstances.

An LEO may conduct a search or seizure of a person or item absent a warrant if the LEO establishes probable cause that a crime has been, is, or is about to be committed, so long as that search/seizure is in the plain view of the officer. Inside your home or tent is not in plain view. Your front yard is; the inside of your car is, etc.

No agent of the government has "right of entry" into your home or tent. This is why the 4th/A exists.

Blackcloud,

I don't think this jack@ss is any part of LEO. I have also never heard of anyone who was criminal prosecuted for opening another persons tent. I'm not going to suggest it is right, but I'm not aware if it would fall under the 4th/A because one, the person camping has no more legal right to the area as anyone else. It is after all on public land. There may be cases that have happen but I am not aware of any. There have also been a number of times in the news where LEO has cleared a camp without a warrant such as a homeless camp setup illegally within a city, park or forest. There was no warrant issued but it was still done.

[Alligator]

There were no funds reported seized from the hiker just drugs. Please keep it hiking related. Thank you.

[Traveler]

Interesting issue. Some States and local government have crafted ordinances to discourage "tent cities" of homeless people using tents and boxes as domiciles. These ordinances are constantly being challenged in court, though these do not impact recreational camping.

Typically, 4th Amendment protections exist for tents used in recreational, legal camping in defined/approved areas and public lands for the most part ("stealth" camping on private property absent permission being a huge gray area). Where some people get tangled up in the legalities is being engaged in illegal/illicit activities that can be seen from outside the tent or in communal shelters where the expectation of privacy does not exist. The only exceptions for are exigent circumstances that allow LEO entry without warrant, such as the destruction of evidence, imminent violence to persons, fleeing from arrest, or if the tent is open for anyone to casually see inside and can see behaviors or illegal/illicit substances (plain view doctrine).

Fortunately, the 4th amendment of the Constitution exists in all States and has been repeatedly upheld by the US Supreme Court.

[Wolf - 23000]

Interesting issue. Some States and local government have crafted ordinances to discourage "tent cities" of homeless people using tents and boxes as domiciles. These ordinances are constantly being challenged in court, though these do not impact recreational camping.
Typically, 4th Amendment protections exist for tents used in recreational, legal camping in defined/approved areas and public lands for the most part ("stealth" camping on private property absent permission being a huge gray area). Where some people get tangled up in the legalities is being engaged in illegal/illicit activities that can be seen from outside the tent or in communal shelters where the expectation of privacy does not exist. The only exceptions for are exigent circumstances that allow LEO entry without warrant, such as the destruction of evidence, imminent violence to persons, fleeing from arrest, or if the tent is open for anyone to casually see inside and can see behaviors or illegal/illicit substances (plain view doctrine).

Fortunately, the 4th amendment of the Constitution exists in all States and has been repeatedly upheld by the US Supreme Court.

This jack@ss is also not part of law enforcement so the 4th Amendment does not apply. He is not searching someone home or tent. He is reported as opening a female hiker's tent without her permission/consent because he is a creep. I could be wrong, but I am not aware or anyone who has ever been prosecuted for someone tent.

[Traveler]

I never claimed this fellow was part of law enforcement nor do I defend the alleged behavior he may have demonstrated. The discussion turned to the protections of the 4th amendment as it relates to recreational camping, which is what I was commenting on.

The 4th amendment does not apply directly to citizens per se, it is a protection against unreasonable searches by LEO. We have laws regarding trespass and uninvited entry into private property that would cover the opening of a tent as you describe. However, without a formal complaint by a witness or victim it gets difficult to substantiate the event occurred and police are not able to do much about it beyond a possible conversation with the guy that appears to have occurred that resulted in a minor drug possession charge.

[MtDoraDave]

Hmm, where have I heard this exact scenario before? Oh, and the inconvenience of having to briefly interrupt one's hike in order to possibly save other hiker's lives.

I have read this whole thread before commenting, and I think this is the biggest takeaway from it. Two people were freaked out enough to cancel their hikes, yet nobody could be inconvenienced to stay in town to press charges?
Wasn't it just two or three years ago when a similar story ended in tragedy?
If I ever get a chance to thru hike* I hope, first, that nothing like this happens; but if it does happen in my bubble that I will be willing to take a couple days out of my 5 MONTH trip to see that justice and safety are upheld to the best of my ability to ensure - and that I would be able to convince others to do the same.

*or one on my section hikes.

[gjbu]

I have read this whole thread before commenting, and I think this is the biggest takeaway from it. Two people were freaked out enough to cancel their hikes, yet nobody could be inconvenienced to stay in town to press charges?
Wasn't it just two or three years ago when a similar story ended in tragedy?
If I ever get a chance to thru hike* I hope, first, that nothing like this happens; but if it does happen in my bubble that I will be willing to take a couple days out of my 5 MONTH trip to see that justice and safety are upheld to the best of my ability to ensure - and that I would be able to convince others to do the same.

*or one on my section hikes.

Very well said. I couldn’t agree more.