CJHjrValid XHTML 1.0W3C: Valid CSS2

Alt+left-arrow to return from a link

 

Full-text: August 25 2003
Protest zones: “No War for Oil” (October 24 2002)

United States District Court for the District of South Carolina Columbia Division

Filed, AUG 25 2003, Larry W. Propes, Clerk, Columbia S.C.

 




Criminal No. 3:03-0309

 )
United States of America)
)
-v-)
)
Brett A. Bursey)
 )

Defendant’s Motion to Require Government to Designate Restricted Area

The defendant Brett A. Bursey, through his undersigned attorneys hereby moves the Court for an order requiring the government to provide to the defendant the exact location of the ¶

“posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting”. ¶

This information is needed so that the defendant may adequately prepare his defense for trial.

August 22, 2003

 

Lewis Pitts
1030 Carolina Avenue
Durham, NC 27705
(919) 416-1762
Federal Court No. 3068

Signature: C. Rauch Wise

C. Rauch Wise
305 Main Street
Greenwood, S.C. 29646
(864) 229-5010
Federal Court No. 4723

By: { Signature }

 

Attorneys for Brett A. Bursey

______________________

{Case caption, omitted}

Memorandum in Support of Defendant’s Motion
to Require Government to Designate Restricted Area

To prove the defendant guilty of the charges set forth in the Information, the government is required to prove that Brett A. Bursey entered or remained in ¶

“any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area ... in violation of the regulations governing ingress or egress thereto.” ¶

18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(1)(ii). The regulations set forth in 31 C.F.R. 408.3 {2002: 3kb.txt, 24kb.pdf; current rule: 3kb.txt, 24kb.pdf} sets forth regulations as to who is an invitee. The regulation provides ¶

“Invitees: Persons invited by or having appointments with the protectee, the protectee’s family, or members of the protectee’s staff.” ¶

The regulations concerning ingress and egress relate only to “invitees.” The plain meaning of the statute, when read with the regulations, is that the government must prove the restricted area in {sic: is} one in which only invitees are permitted to be. The defendant simply request{s} that the government inform the {p.2} defendant of the perimeters of the restricted area.

If the defendant is not informed of the area prior to trial the defendant will be unable to adequately prepare his defense. Obviously, the government must know where the restricted area is or it would be unable to establish its case. The statute and regulations do not give the authority to an individual agent to determine the restricted area. The statement by an individual agent as to the location, in the agent’s opinion, of the restricted area is not sufficient to convict. As noted in the brief previously submitted, the “move along” laws are unconstitutional.

If the government is unwilling or unable to provide the defendant with the location of the restricted area, the case should be dismissed. Without such information, the defendant is unable to prepare his defense and the government is unable to prove its case.

August 22, 2003

 

Lewis Pitts
1030 Carolina Avenue
Durham, NC 27705
(919) 416-1762
Federal Court No. 3068

Signature: C. Rauch Wise

C. Rauch Wise
305 Main Street
Greenwood, S.C. 29646
(864) 229-5010
Federal Court No. 4723

By: { Signature }

 

Attorneys for Brett A. Bursey

______________________

Certificate of Service

{No Certificate of Service attached}

 

Source: Photocopy of a duplicate original (the court’s file copy), scanned to pdf.

By CJHjr: Converted to text (OCR: FineReader 6.0), formatted (xhtml/css), links, text {in braces}, highlighting, added paragraphing (for ease of reading) marked with this trailing paragraph symbol:  ¶ .

This case: United States v. Brett A. Bursey (D.S.C., No. 3:03cr309 {175kb.html}, criminal information filed March 7 2003, jury trial denied June 4 2003, bench trial Nov. 12-13 2003, bench trial Nov. 12-13 2003, verdict Jan. 6 2004: guilty, $500 fine (Bristow Marchant, U.S. Magistrate Judge), district appeal docketed Jan. 13 2004, affirmed Sept. 14 2004 (Cameron McGowan Currie, U.S. District Judge), circuit appeal docketed Oct. 7 2004, affirmed July 25 2005 {64kb.pdf, 64kb.pdf}, rehearing denied Sept. 8 2005 (4th Cir., No. 04-4832), petition for certiorari docketed Dec. 14 2005, certiorari denied Jan. 17 2006 (U.S., No. 05-767).

Previous: Defendant’s Memorandum in Support of Dismissal Because of Vagueness (Aug. 20 2003).

See alsoOther Secret Service protest zone cases” on the docket-sheet page. Brett Bursey

This document is not copyrighted and may be freely copied.

Charles Judson Harwood Jr.

CJHjr

Posted Dec. 13 2003. Updated Dec. 13 2003.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/bursey-dsc-d43.html

Visitors (all pages, from Feb. 10 2008):