the united states of america, by and through its attorneys, neil h macbride, united states attorney and andrew c herrold special assistant united states attorney, hereby submits this pretrial memorandum and states as follows.
the defendant is charged with reentering the fort belvoir military installation after having removed therefrom and ordered not to reenter by the former fort belvoir installation commander in violation of title 18 united states code section 1382.
the trial memorandum is submitted pursuant to a request by the honorable john f anderson that the parties submit a memorandum to the court outlining what they believe to be the relevant legal issues in this case. the government contends that the issues are quite simple, and that in addition to proving that the defendant was on fort belvoir after having been removed and ordered not to reenter the government must prove that the united states has the requisite jurisidiction and ownership or possession of the highway in question. united states v, watson 80 f supp 649 e.d. va 1948 at 651
the united states expects the evidence to show that on november 1, 2007 defendant was ordered not to reenter the limits of the united states military reservation of fort belvoir virginia by former fort belvoir instalation commander brian lauristzen colonel u.s. army. on may 15, 2010 at approximately 3:15 p.m. officer thomas of the fort belvior police department observed defendant walking on woodlawn road within the confines of fort belvoir military installation. officer thomas recognised defendant from previous encounters defendant was cited and removed from fort belvoir. the united states expects the evidence to show that in 1944 the united states conveyed to the commonwealth of virginia an easement for a public road over what is now known as woodlawn road.
woodlawn road was used as a public road until shortly after the terrorist attacks of september 11 2001 at which time the road was closed to public travel. the united states and the commonwealth of virginia negotiated the construction of a road that will traverse fort belvoir and will serve as an alternative to woodlawn road. the new road will be open to public travel when it is complete. according to united states v. watson 80 f supp 649 d.c. va 1948 sole ownership or possession as against the accused had to be in the united states or there was no trespass within the meaning of 18 usc 1382 as noted above since shortly after september 11, 2001
woodlawn road has been in the sole possession of the united states large gates extend across the fort belvoir access points of woodlawn road and no trespassing signs are posted at the gate areas in watson the operator of a vehicle was charged with violating 18 usc 1382 after he drove his car onto a road that traversed marine corps base quantico in quantico virginia the road on which the defendant operated his vehicle was a public or county road for access to quantico and the public continued to use it in going to and from quantico. importantly, the road on which the defendant in watson was travelling was the only route that allowed public access to the town of quantico. because marine corps base quantico surrounded the town of quantico the town was completely cut off from the access to highway no 1 and indeed from the rest of virginia by land save for the county or public road which had become fuller road.
in this case woodlawn road is not open to the public to the public public traffic is not allowed on woodlawn road and as noted above access to woodlawn road is blocked and no trespassing signs exist. there is no way that the defendant could mistake the fort belvoir portion of woodlawn road as indistinguishable from a public street as described in united states v. albertini 472 us 675 1985 at 686 citing united states v. flower 407 us 197 (1972) furthermore the closure of woodlawn road did not completely block access to a town or piece of land that lies within the boundries of fort belvoir but that is unrelated to fort belvoir as the closure did in watson. motorists or pedestrians are able to reach the opposite side of fort belvoir by traveling around its boundries.
the commonwealth of virginia has made no claim against the united states to enforce the easement in the ten years since it has been closed the commonwealth has apparantly acquiesced in the united states decision to block access to woodlawn the commonwealth has worked with the united states to develop a replacement to woodlawn road that will be open to public travel the government believes that united states v watson properly addresses what the united states must prove to be successful in the case against the defendant
the trial memorandum is submitted pursuant to a request by the honorable john f anderson that the parties submit a memorandum to the court outlining what they believe to be the relevant legal issues in this case. the government contends that the issues are quite simple, and that in addition to proving that the defendant was on fort belvoir after having been removed and ordered not to reenter the government must prove that the united states has the requisite jurisidiction and ownership or possession of the highway in question. united states v, watson 80 f supp 649 e.d. va 1948 at 651
the united states expects the evidence to show that on november 1, 2007 defendant was ordered not to reenter the limits of the united states military reservation of fort belvoir virginia by former fort belvoir instalation commander brian lauristzen colonel u.s. army. on may 15, 2010 at approximately 3:15 p.m. officer thomas of the fort belvior police department observed defendant walking on woodlawn road within the confines of fort belvoir military installation. officer thomas recognised defendant from previous encounters defendant was cited and removed from fort belvoir. the united states expects the evidence to show that in 1944 the united states conveyed to the commonwealth of virginia an easement for a public road over what is now known as woodlawn road.
woodlawn road was used as a public road until shortly after the terrorist attacks of september 11 2001 at which time the road was closed to public travel. the united states and the commonwealth of virginia negotiated the construction of a road that will traverse fort belvoir and will serve as an alternative to woodlawn road. the new road will be open to public travel when it is complete. according to united states v. watson 80 f supp 649 d.c. va 1948 sole ownership or possession as against the accused had to be in the united states or there was no trespass within the meaning of 18 usc 1382 as noted above since shortly after september 11, 2001
woodlawn road has been in the sole possession of the united states large gates extend across the fort belvoir access points of woodlawn road and no trespassing signs are posted at the gate areas in watson the operator of a vehicle was charged with violating 18 usc 1382 after he drove his car onto a road that traversed marine corps base quantico in quantico virginia the road on which the defendant operated his vehicle was a public or county road for access to quantico and the public continued to use it in going to and from quantico. importantly, the road on which the defendant in watson was travelling was the only route that allowed public access to the town of quantico. because marine corps base quantico surrounded the town of quantico the town was completely cut off from the access to highway no 1 and indeed from the rest of virginia by land save for the county or public road which had become fuller road.
in this case woodlawn road is not open to the public to the public public traffic is not allowed on woodlawn road and as noted above access to woodlawn road is blocked and no trespassing signs exist. there is no way that the defendant could mistake the fort belvoir portion of woodlawn road as indistinguishable from a public street as described in united states v. albertini 472 us 675 1985 at 686 citing united states v. flower 407 us 197 (1972) furthermore the closure of woodlawn road did not completely block access to a town or piece of land that lies within the boundries of fort belvoir but that is unrelated to fort belvoir as the closure did in watson. motorists or pedestrians are able to reach the opposite side of fort belvoir by traveling around its boundries.
the commonwealth of virginia has made no claim against the united states to enforce the easement in the ten years since it has been closed the commonwealth has apparantly acquiesced in the united states decision to block access to woodlawn the commonwealth has worked with the united states to develop a replacement to woodlawn road that will be open to public travel the government believes that united states v watson properly addresses what the united states must prove to be successful in the case against the defendant
No comments:
Post a Comment