Gatlin v. United States
833 A.2d 995 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The common law defense of property is unavailable against a police officer lawfully investigating a criminal complaint in the common areas of a building. Furthermore, the defense requires that any force used to eject a trespasser be reasonable and necessary for the purpose of ejectment, not for another purpose such as retrieving property.
Facts:
- Newspaper reporter Susan Ferrechio entered the Marcus Garvey Charter School to interview Principal Mary Anigbo.
- An altercation occurred in the main office, during which Dr. Anigbo and school employee Brenda Gatlin allegedly assaulted Ferrechio, forcibly took her notebook, and physically ejected her from the building.
- Ferrechio's editor at the Washington Times called 911 to report that a reporter had been assaulted and her notebook stolen at the school.
- Police Officers Best and Poe met Ferrechio and a newspaper photographer, Clifford Owen, outside the school.
- The officers, followed by Ferrechio and Owen, entered the school through an unlocked front door to investigate the complaint.
- In the school's main office, Owen began taking pictures of Gatlin, whom Ferrechio identified as an assailant.
- This action prompted a second altercation, during which Gatlin allegedly punched Owen.
- During the same altercation, Dr. Anigbo and another employee, Serena Smith, allegedly pushed, shoved, and struck Officers Best and Poe as the officers stood between the staff and the newspaper personnel.
Procedural Posture:
- Brenda Gatlin, Serena Smith, and Mary Anigbo were charged in a six-count indictment in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the trial court of first instance.
- The defendants filed motions to suppress evidence from the police entry into the school, which the trial court denied after finding they lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy.
- The case was tried in a bench trial (without a jury).
- The trial court found Ms. Gatlin and Dr. Anigbo guilty of assaulting a reporter and taking property without right.
- The trial court also found Ms. Gatlin guilty of assaulting a photographer.
- The trial court further found Dr. Anigbo and Ms. Smith guilty of assaulting two police officers.
- The defendants (appellants) appealed their convictions to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the common law defense of property justify the use of physical force by school employees to eject police officers investigating a criminal complaint, a photographer accompanying them, or a reporter who was allegedly trespassing?
Opinions:
Majority - Reid, Associate Judge
No. The defense of property does not justify the assaults committed by the school employees. The court held that the defense is not available against police officers who have entered the common, public areas of a building without excessive force to investigate a criminal complaint. Society's interest in the fair and timely administration of its criminal laws outweighs a property owner's right to self-help against police in such circumstances. Similarly, the defense did not apply to the assault on the photographer, as the school employees could have sought assistance from the police officers already on the scene to eject him instead of resorting to force. Regarding the initial assault on the reporter, even if she was a trespasser, the force used by Dr. Anigbo and Ms. Gatlin was unreasonable because it was aimed at retrieving her notebook, not merely ejecting her, and the level of force (punching, kicking, and being thrown out) was excessive.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant limitation on the defense of property doctrine within the District of Columbia. By holding the defense inapplicable against police officers conducting a lawful investigation, the court prioritizes the administration of justice and officer safety over a property owner's right to self-help. This creates a clear precedent that individuals cannot physically resist or eject officers who are legitimately present in common areas in the performance of their duties. The ruling encourages citizens to resolve such disputes through legal channels rather than physical confrontation, thereby aligning the defense of property with modern rules that prohibit forcible resistance to arrest.
Unlock the full brief for Gatlin v. United States