Wyoming - corner crossing trespass case

[Uncle_Milty]

Why cant the state buy a 4 foot wide path under immenent domain? It would only be a few square feet of land.

That would be ideal but from everything I have read around this whole incident a significant portion of the private checker board pieces are owned by the Mega Rich who have no issues throwing their money around to keep things tied up in litigation. They want to keep their private land and the public land too by not allowing access.

There are some really good articles out there around this instance in particular as well as how all of this land came to be.

IMO.......You should be able to access the public just as these individuals did and were rightfully found to be not guilty. Just as someone else said legislation needs to be drafted so that this is no longer and issue.

[El General]

Why cant the state buy a 4 foot wide path under immenent domain? It would only be a few square feet of land.

Because there are thousands of checkerboard situations like this all across the west.

[unclefish]

I would be willing to bet this case doesn’t really do anything as far as corner crossing goes. There will still be cases prosecuting people trying to corner cross. Just my guess.

Agree. The law is still there and more people will be prosecuted. This verdict didn't overturn the current law.

Even if the state clarifies the corner crossing law I bet it will end up in the courts.

[El General]

Wouldn't this case, as a precedent, prevent some of that?

Juries don't set precedent, judges do.

[flywise]

Some folks are just plain sorry as hell.....and they end up there as well

[flywise]

So, the prosecutor tried to say that air space is owned as well.....well how high? Would they prevent a helicopter from flying over the land to access public land?

[Dale Moser]

So, the prosecutor tried to say that air space is owned as well.....well how high? Would they prevent a helicopter from flying over the land to access public land?

Yes it is, and It’s pretty well defined. The jury blew it as far as the law goes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wytex]

There is no law in Wyoming addressing this issue.

They were found not guilty of criminal trespass because they did not intend to hunt on the private property. A civil trespass case is pending in Federal court and that may set precedent.

The checkerboard lands were set aside to help the railroads populate the west and expand, miles along a corridor for the tracks. The land involved in the suit happens to be a nice mountain with lots of elk. Folks have been having issues with that landowner for years, past owners too.

We will see state legislation addressing this I believe, deep pockets will want a law prohibiting it.

WG&F will not and has not cited anyone for corner crossing. Many folks do it just fine without issues.

[wytex]

The jury got it right, the defendants did not trespass under criminal law in Wyoming.
They had no intent to be on private property and were not on private property. They crossed the airspace over the corner via a ladder.
The civil case is going to Federal court.

Here's some info on trespassing in Wyoming :https://wyoleg.gov/InterimCommittee/...ryTrespass.pdf

[HankTheTank]

So, the prosecutor tried to say that air space is owned as well.....well how high? Would they prevent a helicopter from flying over the land to access public land?

Pretty sure I've seen hunting videos where people have done this where flying in was the only way to access public?

Yes it is, and It’s pretty well defined. The jury blew it as far as the law goes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Forgive my ignorance on the matter. Aren't people allowed to fly drones over private property, which can record picture/video? Why can a person's property (drone) under their control occupy someone else's property (airspace), but not the person themself?

[joey1656]

So the area of land they trespassed on was basically half the width of their body? LOL. I couldnt see prosecuting someone who did that on our lease or land. IF they shot an animal on the private land and drug it across- then hell yeah lock em up.

[SabineHunter]

Seems to me that there is an easy solution to this if I was the land owner. I would build a 20' high fence on the four sides, culminating at the center point. The fence only needs to be a couple of panels long. Sort of like a 20' X. Now, try to get a ladder up and over that. I am a property rights guy and don't like trespassers.

[dfkoon]

Eminent domain for a travel corridor seems like the logical solution to this delima.

Navigable airspace is owned by the US government. I don't think right above a fence would count. Gray area.

[El General]

Seems to me that there is an easy solution to this if I was the land owner. I would build a 20' high fence on the four sides, culminating at the center point. The fence only needs to be a couple of panels long. Sort of like a 20' X. Now, try to get a ladder up and over that. I am a property rights guy and don't like trespassers.

What about the property rights of the public? What if I erected a 20 high fence in the same manner on the public land so that the private landowner could not cross?

I think it is reasonable to assume that the public has the same right to access of public land that the private landowner has to private land.

[SabineHunter]

What about the property rights of the public? What if I erected a 20 high fence in the same manner on the public land so that the private landowner could not cross?

I think it is reasonable to assume that the public has the same right to access of public land that the private landowner has to private land.

If the gov wanted to reverse my scenero, I'd be ****** but it's their right too. In my scenero, i wouldn't be eliminating my access to public land.