United States v. Lopez-Mendez
2:25-cr-01434
D.N.M.May 14, 2025Background
- Defendant Jose Domingo Lopez-Mendez was charged by the United States with three misdemeanors: Entry Without Inspection (8 U.S.C. § 1325), Violation of a Security Regulation (50 U.S.C. § 797), and Entering Military Property for an Unlawful Purpose (18 U.S.C. § 1382).
- The criminal complaint alleged defendant entered the New Mexico National Defense Area (NMNDA), a military-regulated area, as part of an attempt to unlawfully enter the U.S. from Mexico.
- Counsel moved to dismiss the two "military trespass" charges (50 U.S.C. § 797 and 18 U.S.C. § 1382) at the initial appearance.
- The court conducted a probable cause review as required by law for a warrantless arrest.
- The court found that the complaint did not establish probable cause as to the two "military trespass" charges, specifically concluding the facts failed to show Lopez-Mendez knew he was entering military property.
- The court dismissed the 50 U.S.C. § 797 and 18 U.S.C. § 1382 charges without prejudice; the Entry Without Inspection charge remained.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mens rea for 50 U.S.C. § 797 | Knowledge of unlawfulness (citing entry without inspection suffices) | Willfulness requires knowledge of the specific regulation violated | Knowledge of general unlawfulness suffices, BUT also must know they entered the regulated area (not shown here) |
| Knowledge required for entry onto military property (18 U.S.C. § 1382) | No knowledge of entry is required as long as defendant had unlawful purpose | Must know entering military property; otherwise, innocent conduct risked | Knowledge of entry onto military property is required |
| Probable cause on "military trespass" charges | Complaint facts show probable cause, as defendant was entering unlawfully | No facts show defendant knew he entered military property | No probable cause; facts fail to show awareness of entry |
| Absence of detailed facts in complaint | Complaint's signage facts sufficient | Needed more specific facts about signage and defendant's awareness | Insufficient; complaint did not show defendant saw/reasonably knew of signage |
Key Cases Cited
- Bryan v. United States, 524 U.S. 184 (1998) (establishes standard for "willfulness" in criminal statutes; requires knowledge that conduct is unlawful)
- Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001) (magistrate judge must review probable cause for non-formal, warrantless arrests)
- Rehaif v. United States, 588 U.S. 225 (2019) (presumption of scienter applies to all but jurisdictional elements of federal crimes)
- United States v. Apel, 571 U.S. 359 (2014) (public roads passing through military property can cause confusion about entry)
- United States v. Wyatt, 964 F.3d 947 (10th Cir. 2020) (endorsement of willfulness instruction requiring knowledge one's conduct is unlawful)