In re Jason Allen D.

127 Md. App. 456 (1999)

From our private database of 47,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Jason Allen D.

Maryland Court of Special Appeals
127 Md. App. 456 (1999)

Facts

A city’s public-housing complex had sidewalk areas that were specifically designated as no-trespass areas, including an area outside a building where Brandon Morris lived with his family. The city’s police officers were encouraged to enforce this restriction. One evening, an officer observed Jason Allen D. (defendant) standing on the sidewalk outside Morris’s building. Jason was Morris’s cousin. The officer asked Jason only whether he lived at the complex. Jason responded that he did not, and the officer did not ask any follow-up questions. The officer confirmed with his dispatch that Jason had not previously been warned about trespassing in that area and issued Jason a written notice that he was not allowed on the property. Almost a year later, another officer was directed to arrest someone who was trespassing at the complex. The officer arrived and arrested Jason, who was not on the complex property at the time of the arrest. Jason was transported to the police station and released to his parents. A few hours later, the same officer was informed that Jason had returned to the complex. When the officer arrived at the complex, he observed Jason standing on the sidewalk with a group of individuals. The officer did not know Jason’s relationship with these individuals, and he did not ask. The officer arrested Jason, and Jason was formally charged with criminal trespass. At trial, undisputed evidence established that lease provisions allowed the complex’s tenants to have visitors and that Jason had been visiting his cousin at the time of his arrest. Jason also testified that during his prior interactions with the officers, they had told him only that he could not return to the property unless he was visiting a resident there. Based on this, Jason had sincerely believed he was allowed to be on the property to visit his cousin. The prosecution argued that the city had a right to restrict access to its property, and it had notified Jason that he was not allowed there. The trial court convicted Jason of criminal trespass, and he appealed to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Hollander, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 911,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 911,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 997 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 911,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,100 briefs - keyed to 997 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership