Watching a Private Event from a Public Vantage Point

My question involves civil rights in the State of: Florida

Hello,

My question involves a situation that occurred to me at a Florida public state University. I am also a student at the University. I am trying to determine what the status of public property means for a public University and what circumstances could alter the freedoms granted in a "public forum."

The specific situation is explained here:

The specific situation involved me arriving to the campus in my vehicle and parking in one of the parking garages at the University. I decided to remain in the parking garage until a later time so that I would not arrive to my meeting too early. I noticed that our University's football team was practicing over at the nearby practice field, visible from the parking garage.

I had glanced and watched the team practice while in the garage. I did this for maybe 5 minutes before I was approached by someone who appeared to be an employee at the University for one of the buildings. He explained to me that the practice field was a private event and that I was not allowed to look at it.

I asked him if this parking garage was closed and whether or not this was public property. He would not answer any questions and asked to bring his supervisor over. When she arrived she basically said the same thing and asked me to leave. Feeling that I was being harassed by these individuals, I asked them under whose authority I was required to vacate the garage.

They explained that the football team coach mandated that the practices be private and that I must leave. She went on to explain that if I were standing on the sidewalk that is surrounding the perimeter of the practice field, even the sidewalk that is adjacent to a city street, and that if I were looking at the practice field, that I would be asked to leave. I said that is fine, but I am not "required" to leave as it is public property.

The argument eventually got circular when they attempted to argue that the practice field was privately owned (which it isn't, but that is besides the point), and even if it were, that doesn't change the fact I was standing in a parking garage.

While this was going on, a third individual, dressed in athletic like clothing started to yell "You need to get out of here!"

He started to make threats such as "you will loose access to football games, I will have you go through the judicial process, you will be arrested" -- things of that sort.

I asked this individuals name, which he declined to answer. He later went on to ask for mine, which I also declined. He argued "Why should I tell you my name, if you won't tell me yours" type argument, which left me with the impression of "Why would I subject myself to a random stranger who wont identify himself who seems to have this unilateral authority to tell me what I can and cannot do"

Again, no answer, except that at this point he pulled out his cell phone and said he was calling someone.

It was starting to get closer to my meeting time and because my pleasant time by myself in the garage in the nice cool weather with a hint of sun was being disrupted by these individuals, I decided to leave, but explained I was going to take photographs of them. Considering it being public property, I had every right to, and seeing that I was going to, he used his phone to block his face but I eventually got a photo of him and he got one of me too. I smiled.

The stripped down legal question is here:

What it all comes down to, is do these individuals have any authority to limit my right to be in what I consider a public forum since the parking garage is on public University property and it would be considered reasonable that because it is open for individuals to park in, that I should not be forced or harassed to leave it?

Furthermore, to make the scenario even more simpler, would the same principle apply if I were standing on a public University sidewalk or city sidewalk adjacent to the University property, that I would have to be subjected to not being there?

What, if anything, could police do, if one of us had called them? (They would call for me not leaving, I would argue they harassed me)

Quote:

---

Quoting PublicUniversity

---

The stripped down legal question is here:

What it all comes down to, is do these individuals have any authority to limit my right to be in what I consider a public forum since the parking garage is on public University property and it would be considered reasonable that because it is open for individuals to park in, that I should not be forced or harassed to leave it?

Furthermore, to make the scenario even more simpler, would the same principle apply if I were standing on a public University sidewalk or city sidewalk adjacent to the University property, that I would have to be subjected to not being there?

What, if anything, could police do, if one of us had called them? (They would call for me not leaving, I would argue they harassed me)

---

That is a HARD question. I am not a lawyer, but I will give it a shot.

Although the 1st AM protects freedom of movement/locomotion, such is not always absolute, even on Public property.

Since they were state actors, University employees, the 4th AM may also come under Constitutional scrutiny?

Policies are in place, and as such, if no viewing was permitted, even from a public parking garage, it's not easy to say if they violated your rights by demanding you leave.

I do not know how the Campus Police would have handled it.

If I were one of them I would have said I am not sure if I have the authority to ban him as he paid his parking fee and is simply standing here instead of sitting in his car??

Sometimes practices are closed to the public, often times due to NCAA rules to keep scouts/agents at bay. If the practices are closed to the public, something a call to the athletic department could answer, then they were probably within their rights to prevent you from continuing to observe. The schools have the right to have policies in place, which by being a student there you agreed to abide by, and to enforce those policies. Could the situation have been handled differently? Perhaps. Also, if the parking garage is one that is accessible only by students/faculty, then it is not technically public.

the garage is not a "public forum".
While they could not prevent you from viewing the even from a truly public vantage point, they can tell you to leave University property or any specific part of the campus.
for some reason, you are under the mistaken belief that due to public funds supporting the school, or even that you are a student there, that you can demand access to any given part of the school. You can't.

If you believe you have such a right, go on down to your local police station, stand inside the building somewhere and refuse to leave when ordered to do so. Public property does not mean there are no controls on it. The only place you have a right to be is on your property.

Quote:

---

Furthermore, to make the scenario even more simpler, would the same principle apply if I were standing on a public University sidewalk or city sidewalk adjacent to the University property, that I would have to be subjected to not being there?

---

a "public University sidewalk", if on the campus, is under the control of the University. As such, they can tell you to move along. On a city sidewalk, unless there was some crime committed, there would be nothing the University could do.

Quote:

---

What, if anything, could police do, if one of us had called them? (They would call for me not leaving, I would argue they harassed me)

---

you would be ordered to move your vehicle or risk trespass charges.

Trespassing might be hard to support if the garage is open to public access and the party had followed the rules for admission (being a student, paid for parking, etc.). But, loitering might be an issue as most parking garages are not going to want people - potential thieves and vandals - hanging around int he parking garage. But, to make them move because they just happen to be able to see something from their vantage point would be ... uh ... unlawful, in my opinion. If I could see the practice from my balcony, could the police them come over and order me to stop looking? The answer would be, "Heck no!" Therefore, I would have to believe that unless another offense can be charged, or other lawful authority exists to compel him to move, he cannot be told to move from a public place simply because he can see a private practice.

.

Quote:

---

If I could see the practice from my balcony, could the police them come over and order me to stop looking? The answer would be, "Heck no!"

---

and that is exactly what I said but other than that, a school has the right to control actions on their property. The claim it being a "public" property is a misnomer. It is not public property any more than the neighborhood police station or high school would be. To believe a school does not have the right to control the actions on their property (as long as they are not based on illegal discrimination) is simply wrong.

Quote:

---

But, to make them move because they just happen to be able to see something from their vantage point would be ... uh ... unlawful, in my opinion.

---

Really? What law would this be?

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

. and that is exactly what I said but other than that, a school has the right to control actions on their property. The claim it being a "public" property is a misnomer. It is not public property any more than the neighborhood police station or high school would be. To believe a school does not have the right to control the actions on their property (as long as they are not based on illegal discrimination) is simply wrong.

---

It still has to conform with the law and have properly posted restrictions. I am not a college student, but I can freely access most every college campus in my state without violating the law. Unless I am otherwise breaking the law (loitering or trespassing in violation of some ordinance or state law governing time and place) then I can meander about as I please and they cannot lawfully prohibit me from doing so.

As I said, unless the OP was violating the law concerning the access and use of the facility, they really had no lawful authority to force him to move.

I strongly suspect that the parking people in this case were adhering to a rule they heard about, but failed to heed the law ... nor should they be expected to KNOW the law.

Quote:

---

Really? What law would this be?

---

We'll start with the 4th Amendment and go from there.

Do you REALLY BELIEVE that I can be ordered to avert my eyes when standing on my own balcony? Really? Please cite what law in ANY state would COMPEL me - under penalty of incarceration - to avert my eyes from something I can see unaided from my own balcony. Any state will do.

Quote:

---

Do you REALLY BELIEVE that I can be ordered to avert my eyes when standing on my own balcony? Really? Please cite what law in ANY state would COMPEL me - under penalty of incarceration - to avert my eyes from something I can see unaided from my own balcony. Any state will do.

---

again, you go back to what I agreed IS lawful. On your property, you control what you do.

beyond that, watching something isn't the issue but whether the personnel in charge of a university that somebody wants to claim is public can control what happens on their campus. Part of the problem comes from using the term "public" which is incorrect. It is a state university. The property is owned by the state and the citizens have no more control over such a property as a shareholder would over the company they own shares in.

Quote:

---

It still has to conform with the law and have properly posted restrictions. I am not a college student, but I can freely access most every college campus in my state without violating the law. Unless I am otherwise breaking the law (loitering or trespassing in violation of some ordinance or state law governing time and place) then I can meander about as I please and they cannot lawfully prohibit me from doing so.

---

I fervently disagree. This is state property and the state can place and enforce rules, including the right to control those on the premises or demand they leave. The OP has no inherent rights to demand any rights to be in any particular place on the campus at any given time.

It has been ruled that Fl Statute 810.08 is applicable to a state university.

Quote:

---

Downer v. State, 375 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1979), reh. den. (1979), which
affirmed the right of a public agency to deny public access to the extent necessary
for the orderly functioning of that public facility and that allowed the agency to
adopt “reasonable restrictions” to preserve such order.

---

Quote:

---

Downer v. State, 375 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1979), reh. den. (1979), which affirmed the right of a public agency to deny public access to the extent necessary for the orderly functioning of that public facility and that allowed the agency to adopt “reasonable restrictions” to preserve such order.

---

Would "public access" mean a person in transit, OR a person who is USING the facility of this agency.

Big difference in my mind.

to me, public access would mean neither but simply; access to the public at large without making such distinction. While an argument might be able to be made the guy is a student and therefore afforded access to areas generally restricted to the public at large, I would go a bit further and say that the proprietors still are given control of the property as the deem necessary especially since he is a student. I don't know of a school that does not include such rules in their agreements when a person attends to that school.

and if nothing else, the guy was loitering. It was a parking garage. The intended use of the structure is to park your car there while attending to business. There is surely no business within the garage.

I have read the rules for 3 different Florida state colleges. Here is the link to one: http://regulations.ucf.edu/~regs/pdf..._Feb09_001.pdf

they all appear to be nearly identical. Within the statement, it simply states the college has the right to control their property as they deem proper and necessary. I would suggest it is a position taken by the state in general concerning state schools.