Suppose I am fed up with Jehovah’s Witnesses and door-to-door salespeople knocking on my door at all hours. So I post signs on the edge of my property similar to the “POSTED” signs that landowners use in rural areas to keep hunters off their land. The signs clearly say “no soliciting” and “no tresspassing”.
A pair of JWs marches right past my sign and knocks on my door. Do I have the right to make a citizen’s arrest on them? And if not, can I call the police and have the police arrest them? If not, why not?
Different states have different laws on citizen arrest. I don’t think every state allows it. And some limit it to felonies.
Generally speaking, the kind of trespassing you describe is not a crime but a civil offense (but this also varies by state). You cannot arrest someone for it. Moreover, there is often an exception to trespass laws for someone to approach your door even if you’ve posted signs.
You sure can. It’s called a fence with a locking gate.
Other than that, I know that in Florida this would be a civil matter. If you tell these door knockers to leave and they refuse, then it would become a criminal matter.
But I can’t understand what you are saying. Should the local girl scout troop get locked up because they knocked on your door when you didn’t want them to?
Depending on state law, you can probably create a situation of civil trespass by posting the signs you mention in your OP (for which you can call the police or file a civil action). But you won’t be able to turn it into criminal trespass.
Actually, yes. If I clearly post signs warning people that they will be arrested and prosecuted if they tresspass onto my property and *they do it anyway * then, uh, yeah I see no problem with following through.
I should not need to spend thousands of dollars on fences and locks just to keep people off MY property. Especially people who are already aware that they are not welcome. What’s so wrong with this?
IANAL, YANMC, and this is not only not legal advice, it’s the opinions of an educated layman.
With that in place:
A. Trespass is, I believe, a tort at common law, and probably incorporated into most jurisdictions’ codified civil law as well. That is, if someone enters onto your property not only without your consent but in defiance of your explicit wishes (“No Trespassing” signs), you have a civil case against them.
B. In many jurisdictions, a crime (misdemeanor or petty offense) of criminal trespass exists, sometimes in degrees. I think there has to be intent to commit a criminal act to invoke it, by and large – but I don’t know that for sure. Walking across your meadow or through your woodlot to admire the pretty flowers is not a criminal offense; entering into the woods you’ve posted because it’s where your grandson and his friends have their treefort, in order to go rabbit hunting, is probably a crime in most areas.
C. Ignoring a “no solicitors” sort of notice and disturbing the occupants, whether to proselytize or to sell door-to-door, is a form of harassment, as well as trespass, and can often be pursued either criminally or civilly.
D. State laws on what constitutes a valid citizen’s arrest, if anything, vary greatly, and in many jurisdictions, attempting to commit a citizen’s arrest that doesn’t comply with the statute can be a form of illegal restraint in and of itself. Extreme caution is advised.
Summary: It’s almost certainly the best idea to consult local authorities or a lawyer familiar with your jurisdiction’s laws on trespass and citizen’s arrest before you get into such a position.
“Reasonable man” applies. If a court agrees that sign(s) had been posted in such a way that any reasonable person ought to have noticed them, the fact (or what’s alleged as fact) that the accused did not is not, generally speaking, a valid defense.
The tort of trespass to land does not require intent; only that the movement onto the land resulted from a voluntary act of the trespasser. I would be surprised if criminal trespass were strict liability.
I doubt one would get much traction from either approach (getting only nominal damages [$1] for the tort, and a nolle prosequi for the crime). Harassment is a non-starter as well; fundamentally because society just isn’t interested in spending a lot of resources to prevent the occasional housecall by a JW. Perhaps if you could show that the JWs were targeting your house, you might get an injunction enjoining those particular JW or their congregation.
The “citizen’s arrest” would lead, quite justifiably, to a suit for false imprisonment. Property law, as all law, is meant to facilitate the efficient functioning of society, not to license psychotic exercises in modern anomie. And it happens that we occasionally need to knock on people’s front doors at reasonable times without worrying about becoming captives of crazed homeowners.
And why would enforcing my “no tresspassing” signs be called “crazed”? :rolleyes: I am not advocating coming to the door with a shotgun and handcuffs here. Just following through on my clearly stated intention to have tresspassers arrested and prosecuted.
My question is: How could I enforce this? Will the cops come and arrest the tresspassers if I call them? If not, how exactly are “posted” signs enforced? If the cops won’t come and I can’t effect a citizen’s arrest, what is the point of having “posted” signs in the first place?
Define “reasonable time”. I work 3rd shift. I get to bed at 4 am and need to sleep for the next 8 hours to be healthy. That means that a knock on my door at 8 am is the middle of the night for me. How is it reasonable for you to wake me up in the middle of my sleep cycle but not okay for me to bang on your door at 3 am to try to sell you a vacuum?
I can understand how you might feel that way, but from this article by the master:
You can see that there has been an abundance of judicial precedent basically leading up to a very general conclusion of mine, to which your mileage may vary – you have a door, it has a doorbell, a knocker, or can be knocked upon. You’ve invited them, simply by having this social construct, of entryway that announces it’s existence at a domicile. Yes, you can politely ask that “this door is for me, my family and invited guests only”, but you may not be able to enforce that.
Say a neighbor wants to warn you your dog has gotten loose, and is terrifying the neighborhood, say the police want to enter your territory and have a discussion with you on some topic, or someone calls for emergency medical services, against your personal will, from inside your domicile. That’s why your house has a door, and that’s why people come to it. Maybe a religious, charitable, or a salesman’s visit isn’t of the same level as my examples above, but at least one judge thinks that doesn’t matter, in Cecil’s article.
OK, I’m trying to wrap my head around “your door is an invitation,” if I’m understanding you correctly. Is my telephone an invitation to telemarketers, even if I ask them not to call? Or am I not understanding?
Society. Your neighbors, stranded motorists, girl scouts with cookies, etc. Necessity has long been a defense to trespass. Ploof v. Putnam. Of course, the JWs and the vacuum cleaner salesmen don’t have necessity as a justification, and I did say you would win a suit for TtL (albeit with nominal damages). You cannot arrest them; the “citizen’s arrest” is so disfavored in the law today–rightly so–that it can be regarded as chimerical for all intents and purposes.
You want to arrest them, i.e., detain them against their will, because they knocked on your front door! That’s prima facie batshittery, I’m afraid.
What do you think a “citizen’s arrest” looks like?
<ding dong>
JW: Would you like a copy of The Watchtower?
Homeowner: I’m sorry, didn’t you see the sign? I’m afraid I am going to have to ask you to remain here while the police arrive.
JW: Oh, I don’t think I want to do that.
Homeowner: Haven’t you ever heard of a “citizen’s arrest”? Here, it’s in this book I have that also explains how using a zip code on your mailpieces is a renunciation of your state citizenship and how you can redeem yourself for silver certificates at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
JW: Well, in that case, have you got a chaise longue or anything?
Homeowner: Don’t push it.
A suit for trespass to land is really the only option I can think of. Not that I think enforcing it is a good idea, or even the point of the signs. The signs will deter some people, probably even a fair number of people. I suppose getting a reputation for pathological overreactions would too.
Oh, heavens no. They have much more important things to do than help you bully JWs.
Well, you post signs. It would be a “No Solicitors” sign. Like I said above, in your case, it would serve as a deterrent. The signs you’ve seen are in much different circumstances: typically at the remote periphery of unimproved property. In that case, we (society) don’t have the same interest that we have in maintaining access to the front door of your home. Those signs are used to stave off adverse possession claims, negligence claims, and lend support to trespass cases (because this kind of trespass is much, much less reasonable than knocking on your front door).
The first case we were assigned in my Property class was the celebrated State v. Shack (link is to a decent case brief). I would urge you to note the section titled “Public Policy” and in particular, the second paragraph there.
This happened to me just last weekend. Celtling had a bad night Friday, and we didn’t get much sleep. (Stuffy nose, she couldn’t stay asleep, we were up every two hours.)
During the day Saturday a phalanx of red-shirted trash pick-up salesmen entered and began crawling all over the neighborhood. They rang my doorbell and prevented her from fall asleep at nap time TWICE. (I didn’t answer, I was hoping if I stayed put she’d settle down - nope, 30 minute delay each time.)
When she finally went to sleep, I passed out on my bed and was awakened by a guy who rang the bell three times. By the time I got dressed and went to the door he was headed down the street.
I went back to sleep and was awakened again by one of these losers, who also wakened her.
I answered the door this time, with a crying baby in one hand and a baseball bat in the other.
I’m certain those boys will be telling stories for years and wondering about the crazy disheveled redneck woman (I was barefoot and in sweats) with the baseball bat and how the heck she ever ended up in the NOVA suburbs. . .
Yeah, it’s really lucky for them that I don’t own a shotgun.
The problem with using Jehovah’s Witnesses is you have more than a tresspass law. You also have a “Freedom of Religion” issue which is protected by the 1st admendment and a freedom of speech also protected by same admendment.
That would over rule any local law.
No tresspassing signs are fine, but what if you can’t read? How do you prove the OWNER put it there. What’s to stop me from buying them at Walgreens and putting them up at random? Nothing. There are just too many variables to make things like that stick.
When the law looks at “resonable,” it can vary from place to place and judge to judge. As a person who’s worked a good part of my life on the overnight shift, I can say a judge would say “It’s reasonable to expect MOST people work in the daytime,” so even if you don’t that’s your issue.
The real problem with citizen’s arrests are you the person doing the arresting run the chance to be charged with false imprisonment if you try to detain the person. If you live in a city like Chicago, one would expect a judge to say, “You could’ve much easier called 9-11, then arrested the guy yourself.”
The law requires one, when possible, to mitigate damages and not to rush in like a bull in a china shop. For example if you see someone come in a moving van to your neighbors (who you know are on vacation) and instead of calling the cops you try to detain them, I would think most courts would say you acted incorrectly. Therefore any false imprisonment charges may hold. If a “reasonable” person would think the cops had plenty of time to arrive and arrest these “fake” movers you need to exercise the “correct” option, not the one YOU feel like doing.
What is reasonable? What a judge decides. And this can vary.
