United States v. Lanning
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
723 F.3d 476 (2013)
- Written by Galina Abdel Aziz , JD
Facts
The National Park Service and United States Forest Service conducted a joint operation to investigate male-on-male sexual activity in Blue Ridge Parkway in Buncombe County, North Carolina. Joseph Darling, an undercover park ranger, walked past Lanning, and Lanning grabbed his own groin and kept walking. Minutes later, Darling found Lanning by himself and began to discuss the weather. Darling mentioned that there was an open community in the area. Lanning responded that he wanted to have sex. Darling responded affirmatively, and then Lanning turned around, backed close to Darling, and very briefly touched Darling’s clothed crotch area. Lanning was charged for disorderly conduct in violation of 26 C.F.R. § 2.34(a)(2), which prohibited disorderly conduct when the language, utterance, or gesture was obscene. Lanning unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the case, and the magistrate judge sentenced Lanning to 15 days in prison, a $1,000 fine, and a two-year ban on visiting federal forests and parks. Lanning appealed. The district court affirmed but vacated and remanded Lanning’s sentence. The magistrate judge resentenced Lanning to 15 days in prison and a $500 fine. Lanning appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wynn, J.)
Dissent (Duncan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.