Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trespass Warning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Magistrate accepts modified trespass warning and closes appellant's appeal in Titusville
Summary
A magistrate accepted a negotiated modified trespass warning that restricts certain conduct at Titusville City Hall, and closed the appellant's appeal. The warning remains enforceable under Florida trespass law and the city said it will remain in effect for one year.
A magistrate in Titusville accepted a negotiated modified trespass warning and closed the appeal by an appellant identified in the record as Mister House, resolving a dispute stemming from an Aug. 1 incident in front of City Hall, city attorney James Stokes said.
Stokes told the hearing that House was involved in activity outside City Hall on Aug. 1 and that officers issued a trespass warning. "He was issued a trespass warning," Stokes said, and the city and appellant negotiated a narrower, modified warning that both sides agreed to record.
The magistrate described the terms in court: City Hall is a limited public forum, so protest is allowed, but the modification bars affixing materials to the building or poles, erecting temporary or permanent structures that block walkways, stairs, ramps, sidewalks or parking, and conducting disruptive activity such as operating a motorcycle with music loud enough to be heard inside City Hall. The magistrate said, "This modified trespass warning will become part of the record on the appeal and will therefore close the matter," and noted the warning is enforceable under Florida's trespass statute.
Mister House told the magistrate he objected to the characterization that he had been asked to leave. He said officers did not tell him to leave on the body-camera video and that he had driven away, been stopped by police, and later sat on the City Hall steps because he was "hot and exhausted." "I left the property without being asked to leave," House said during his brief remarks.
House and the city confirmed the signed modification in court; the parties and the magistrate agreed the remaining conditions of the original one-year trespass warning would stay in place and the city indicated it had no objection to the modified terms being effective for one year. The magistrate closed the hearing and adjourned the trespass-appeal matter.
The record shows the resolution was handled as a stipulation between the appellant and the city and was entered by the magistrate rather than resolved by a contested evidentiary hearing.
