2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes › Title 37. Hawaii Penal Code › 708. Offenses Against Property Rights › 708-815 Simple trespass. § §708-813 To 708-815 Commentary:

§708-815 Simple trespass.
(1) A person commits the offense of simple trespass if the person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises.
(2) Simple trespass is a violation. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; gen ch 1993]
Case Notes
Where defendant requested court to instruct jury on time-barred lesser included offense of simple trespass under this section, defendant waived statute of limitations under §701-114(1)(e). 87 H. 108, 952 P.2d 865 (1997).
Where police had probable cause to arrest defendant without a warrant for fourth degree theft, a petty misdemeanor under §708-833, and simple trespass, a violation under this section, and §803-6 authorized them to cite, rather than arrest, defendant for those offenses if defendant did not have any outstanding arrest warrants, outstanding warrant check on defendant by police not unconstitutional. 91 H. 111 (App.), 979 P.2d 1137 (1999).
COMMENTARY ON § §708-813 TO 708-815
The essence of the offense of criminal trespass is "entering and remaining unlawfully," as defined by §708-800. It is basic to the offense that the actor have some knowledge that the actor's presence on the premises is not licensed, invited, or privileged.
Under that definition, a person does not transgress when he enters or stays in a place open at the time to the public, unless he is specifically warned not to enter or remain. The fact that some portions of the premises were open to the public, including the defendant, does not mean that he has a privilege with reference to closed-off portions.[1]
The simple offense (i.e., §708-815) is defined in terms of entering or remaining on premises with knowledge of this fact ("...the person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises"). Simple trespass is a violation.
Two degrees of aggravated trespass are provided by the Code. The most serious aggravation occurs when the trespass is to a dwelling as defined by §708-800. Section 708-813 (criminal trespass in the first degree), makes this offense a misdemeanor. "The alarm caused to inhabitants by the entry, and the likelihood of violence which may injure someone, including the intruder, are sufficient to warrant increased penalties."[2] A second, less serious aggravation, occurs when the premises are enclosed or fenced. Under §708-814 (criminal trespass in the second degree), this kind of trespass is made a petty misdemeanor.
Act 55, Session Laws 1974, amended §708-813(1), relating to criminal trespass in the first degree, by making it an offense for a person to knowingly enter or remain unlawfully in or upon the premises of a hotel or apartment building in addition to a dwelling. The law was changed primarily to deal with the problem of prostitution in hotels and apartments. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 699-74. Section 708-813 was also amended by Act 32, Session Laws 1975, which added subsection (2). The purpose of the new language was to aid ranchers in proceeding against rustlers. The legislature found that it was difficult to catch rustlers in the act. Under the new subsection, one apprehended in an enclosed area in possession of a firearm could be punished as a misdemeanant.
Act 49, Session Laws 1974, amended §708-814, criminal trespass in the second degree, to include the situation where a person is unlawfully on school premises and refuses to leave after reasonable warning or request to leave. In explaining the change, the House Committee on Judiciary and Corrections in Standing Committee Report No. 727-74 stated:
Your Committee understands that there are some schools without fences and under present statutes, persons trespassing on such premises commit the offense of simple trespass. Simple trespass is a violation and is enforceable only by means of a penal summons. Your Committee finds that persons trespassing on school premises, whether fenced or unfenced, should be subject to the offense of criminal trespass in the second degree, a petty misdemeanor.
Where adverse circumstances, e.g., flood, storm, etc., require one to take refuge upon the premises of another, such action is not penal because it comes within the choice of evils justification set forth in §703-302.
Any trespass statute which is applied in situations involving political or religious solicitation becomes subject to constitutional scrutiny. As the drafters of the Proposed Michigan Revised Criminal Code, one of the sources from which this chapter of the Code is derived, noted:
This activity does not fall within §[708-815] because (a) in most instances the entry is privileged by custom and therefore is not unlawful within the definition of 'enter or remain unlawfully' in §[708-800], if the owner does not post his premises or give specific notice to the religious or campaign worker to stay off or leave the premises there is no change in the customary law, and (b) even if the owner does not desire the person to enter, the latter does not 'know' within the meaning of §[702-206(2)(b)] that he is entering or remaining unlawfully unless the notice is communicated to him. If he forces his way into an enclosure that is posted or into a dwelling, with the knowledge that his presence is not wanted he fits the language of § §[708-813 to 815], but can still contend that the statute as to him under the circumstances infringes on his freedoms of speech or religion. Even if he prevails with regard to the prosecution against him, however, this does not void the statute as far as cases not involving these freedoms are concerned, under well-established constitutional case law.[3]
Previous Hawaii law imposed a single low-grade misdemeanor sanction for trespass.[4] The offense was not differentiated, as in the Code, and did not account adequately for the varying circumstances in which trespass may arise.
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENTARY ON § §708-813 TO 708-815
Act 201, Session Laws 1979, added §708-814(c) to upgrade the penalty for the acts referred to from a violation to a petty misdemeanor. The legislature found that the police would not place persons charged with simple trespass under physical arrest without a penal summons being first obtained. In upgrading the offense, the legislature sought to give retailers a more effective means of removing persons who harass or inconvenience customers or cause a loss of sales. House Standing Committee Report No. 984.
Act 177, Session Laws 1981, rearranged the former text and added subsection (1)(c) to §708-813, formerly §708-814(1)(b), thereby upgrading trespass upon school premises from a petty misdemeanor to a misdemeanor. The increase in penalty was designed to curb vandalism and violence on school campuses, much of which appeared to be caused by person unlawfully there. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 720, House Standing Committee Report No. 627.
Act 89, Session Laws 1996, amended §708-813(1) by clarifying that the provisions of the subsection pertain to both public and private schools. Conference Committee Report No. 64.
Act 146, Session Laws 1998, addressed the problem of trespassing and amended §708-814 by requiring that written warnings to leave be given by the owner or lessee of the premises or their agent, or by a police officer. In State v. Sadler, 80 H. 372, 375 (1996), the Hawaii intermediate court of appeals held that the offense of criminal trespass in the second degree under §708-814(1)(b) "contemplates a warning or request contemporaneous with a person entering or remaining unlawfully on the premises." Therefore, in order to convict a person for criminal trespass in the second degree, the person must refuse a warning or request to leave that is made contemporaneously with the person's entering or remaining on the premises. The legislature found that under the court's interpretation of the current law, as long as a trespasser left the premises immediately upon being ordered to do so, the trespasser could return that same day with no fear of arrest. The interpretation was burdensome on commercial establishments because owners and operators were unable to meaningfully evict trespassers who may interfere with business and commit property crimes. Conference Committee Report No. 81, House Standing Committee Report No. 711-98.
Act 200, Session Laws 2000, among other things, amended §708-813(1) by qualifying that the pre-arrest warning requirement is excepted between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m., when most persons have no legitimate purpose on campus. House Standing Committee Report No. 1283-00.
Act 50, Session Laws 2004, amended §708-814(1) to protect public property from trespassers by applying the offense of criminal trespass in the second degree, a petty misdemeanor, to persons who enter or remain unlawfully on any public property after a reasonable warning or request to leave has been given by the owner or lessee of the property. House Standing Committee Report No. 901-04.
Act 181, Session Laws 2005, amended §708-814 by specifying that a person commits criminal trespass in the second degree if the person enters or remains on agricultural lands without the permission of the owner of the land, the owner's agent, or the person in lawful possession of the land. Agricultural theft is a critical problem for Hawaii's farmers, who are especially vulnerable to theft since farms are usually located on large plots of land in sparsely populated areas, isolated from law enforcement. Although many farms have fences and other simple barriers surrounding their property, the obstacles are easily overcome by thieves and do little to deter trespassing. Conference Committee Report No. 78, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1164.
Act 212, Session Laws 2005, established the petty misdemeanor offense of criminal trespass onto public parks and recreational grounds ( §708-814.5). Act 212 also repealed the amendments made to the offense of criminal trespass in the second degree ( §708-814) by Act 50, Session Laws 2004. Act 50 was intended to address the problem of squatters in public parks or campgrounds, but the law was being broadly used in circumstances not related to squatting. Conference Committee Report No. 82.
Act 208, Session Laws 2011, amended §708-814(1) by prohibiting a person from entering or remaining unlawfully on unimproved or unused lands that are fenced, enclosed, or clearly marked by signage. Act 208 also added entering or remaining on agricultural lands that are fallow or have evidence of livestock at the time of entry to the offense of trespass in the second degree. The legislature found that trespassing is a major problem for owners of unimproved or unused land. Trespassers often damage property and crops and increase the liability of the owners of the land. Trespassers also use unimproved and unused lands as illegal dump sites and places to conduct illicit activities. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 830, House Standing Committee Report No. 934.
Act 145, Session Laws 2013, amended §708-814 to: (1) broaden the offense of criminal trespass in the second degree to include a person who enters or remains unlawfully in or upon the premises of any public housing project after a reasonable warning or request to leave by housing authorities or a police officer; (2) clarify that the warning or request to leave would not be necessary between 10:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. at any public housing project that is closed to the public during those hours and has signs of a certain size and placement to provide sufficient notice of the closure; and (3) define "housing authorities." The legislature found that the Hawaii public housing authority continues to make improvements to security measures at many of the high risk housing projects, including the addition of fences, security fences, and photo identification cards for tenants. The legislature further found that Act 145 would significantly improve the ability of the authority to ensure a secure, livable community for residents. Conference Committee Report No. 32, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1333.
Act 101, Session Laws 2015, amended § §708-813 and 708-814 to shield process servers performing their duties from prosecution under criminal trespass statutes when they enter premises that are not secured by a fence or a locked gate. The legislature found that process servers are an important part of the judicial process. Act 101 allowed process servers to enter or remain in or upon the premises of another for the purpose of making a good faith attempt to serve process upon certain individuals. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1363, Conference Committee Report No. 22.
Act 136, Session Laws 2017, amended §708-814 by clarifying the signage posting requirements that provide notice to a person entering or remaining unlawfully on agricultural lands or unimproved or unused lands without permission and to a person entering or remaining unlawfully in or upon the premises of any public housing project or state low-income housing project. Act 136 also added §708-814.7, which establishes the offense of criminal trespass onto state lands to prohibit a person from entering or remaining unlawfully in or upon any improved state land, or in or upon any state land on or under any highway, subject to certain conditions and exemptions. The legislature found that it was unclear whether existing criminal trespass laws applied to improved state lands, state land on or under any highway, or unfenced, unenclosed, or unsecured agricultural lands owned by the State. Act 136 addressed the application of criminal trespass laws with respect to state lands to provide a stronger and clearer deterrent to illegal activity. Conference Committee Report No. 41, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 719.
Act 31, Session Laws 2018, amended §708-814 to clarify that a person commits criminal trespass in the second degree if the person enters or remains: (1) unlawfully in areas of a housing project that are closed to the public; or (2) in violation of a written warning or request to leave the housing project. The legislature found that one of the greatest concerns and priorities of the Hawaii public housing authority is the safety and well-being of its tenants and staff. However, there had been a number of incidents occurring on housing project properties due to the presence of uninvited individuals, including unauthorized individuals entering onto public housing property and setting up tents in the middle of the property or causing property damage, or evicted tenants returning to the property to harass or intimidate their former neighbors. These activities create conflict among the tenants as well as staff. Accordingly, Act 31 provided the Hawaii public housing authority with a tool to address and resolve these matters. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 3432, Conference Committee Report No. 38-18.
Act 245, Session Laws 2019, amended §708-814 to specify that, for purposes of making a complaint for criminal trespass in the second degree on commercial premises, a prior "reasonable warning or request" to leave the premises may be evidenced by a copy of the previously issued written warning or request, whether or not the copy is posted at the premises or retained by the county police department. The legislature found that the execution of criminal trespass laws for persons who have entered or remained unlawfully on another's commercial property had become unnecessarily complex. Police officers enforcing the law against a person who had previously been issued a reasonable warning or request to leave and who subsequently violated that warning or request sometimes required the owner or lessee of the commercial premises to be present and in possession of the original copy of the prior written warning or request to leave before allowing a complaint to be made. Act 245 clarified that a copy of a reasonable warning or request is sufficient for purposes of making a complaint for criminal trespass in the second degree on commercial premises, albeit the legislature noted that the original reasonable warning or request must have been legitimate for a copy of that request to suffice for the purposes of making a complaint. Conference Committee Report No. 6, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 771.
Act 209, Session Laws 2023, amended § §708-13 and 708-14 to shield professional land surveyors and their assistants from prosecution under criminal trespass laws when performing their duties. The legislature found that there is a public interest in maintaining a sound and uniform real property system by surveying common property boundaries. Professional land surveyors often require the right to access private property for the purposes of producing a thorough and complete land survey. To properly conduct their surveys, professional land surveyors need access to adjoining lands to record boundary lines, recover or reestablish boundary monuments or survey controls, and locate rights-of-way or improvements with positional discrepancies. However, without a right of entry, a professional land surveyor conducting a land survey is subject to trespass laws. The legislature additionally found that the current practice was for surveyors to verbally ask for permission to enter a property for the purpose of surveying; however, sometimes obtaining verbal permission was not an option. Accordingly, Act 209 protected the surveyor from liability while informing the property owner of the proposed survey. Conference Committee Report No. 30, House Standing Committee Report No. 1867, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 858, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 588, House Standing Committee Report No. 1380.
Act 228, Session Laws 2023, added §708-814.8 to clarify that when trespass involves public land, all state and county law enforcement officers may enforce trespass laws, without regard to whether the land is owned by the State or by a county. The legislature found that jurisdictional uncertainties limited cooperation between county and state law enforcement officers to effectively remove trespassers from public property. This uncertainty could lead to damage to public land and harm to those who use it. Act 228 made it clear that either state or county law enforcement could enforce trespass laws regardless of which governmental entity owns or controls a parcel of public land, which would ensure that the public can enjoy public land safely. Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1585, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1148.
__________
§ §708-813 To 708-815 Commentary:
1. Prop. Mich. Rev. Cr. Code, comments at 196.
2. Id.
3. Prop. Mich. Rev. Cr. Code, comments at 197.
4. H.R.S. §771-1.