NC Court of Appeals dismisses appeal in Asheville journalists’ trespass case, leaving Superior Court convictions in place

Press release from Buncombe District Attorney’s Office:

The North Carolina Court of Appeals has dismissed the appeal of journalists Matilda Rae Bliss and Melissa Ann Coit, upholding their convictions for second-degree trespass stemming from their presence in Asheville’s Aston Park after hours in December 2021. This decision reinforces the validity of the City of Asheville’s park closure ordinance as applied to ensure the continued use of public parks for legitimate public use by all members of the community. Bliss and Coit, journalists for The Asheville Blade, were convicted by a Buncombe County Superior Court jury on June 15, 2023, of violating N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-159.13. The charges arose from their presence in Aston Park around 10:30 p.m. on December 25, 2021, after the park’s 10:00 p.m. closing time as established by Asheville City Code § 12-41. The Court of Appeals’ dismissal was based on procedural deficiencies in the appellate record, specifically the lack of documentation verifying the Superior Court’s jurisdiction following the District Court proceedings. This technical dismissal effectively leaves the Superior Court convictions in place. The underlying case involved significant First Amendment arguments, with the defendants asserting their rights as journalists were violated when they were arrested while covering a protest. However, as detailed in the Superior Court’s June 22, 2023 ruling, the defendants’ actions violated a content-neutral, time, place, and manner restriction designed to ensure public safety and the orderly use of city parks. Key Findings of the Superior Court’s Ruling: Content-Neutral Ordinance: The City of Asheville’s ordinance, which closes parks between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., is a content-neutral regulation that applies to all individuals, regardless of their profession or purpose. Legitimate Government Interest: The ordinance serves substantial government interests, including public safety, park maintenance, and preventing overuse and unsanitary conditions. Nondiscriminatory Enforcement: The defendants were not singled out due to their journalistic activities. The police enforced the ordinance in a neutral, nondiscriminatory manner, informing all individuals in the park of the closure and the consequences of remaining. First Amendment Rights Not Absolute: While the defendants argued their First Amendment rights were violated, the court affirmed that these rights are not absolute and must be balanced against legitimate government interests. Alternative Information Gathering: The court noted that alternative methods of gathering information were available to the defendants, including interviews, public records, and body camera footage. Defendants’ First Amendment rights were not given precedence over the First Amendment rights of others by police. The defendants were represented at trial and on appeal by local lawyer Ben Scales and attorney Alan Stuart Graf. The First Amendment Clinic at Duke University School of Law provided Scales and Graf legal assistance at the appellate stage. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press participated as amicus curiae on behalf of defendants in the appeal. “The defendants were first convicted in District Court, appealed and asked for a jury trial and were again convicted by a Buncombe County jury in Superior Court. They then appealed that verdict to the Court of Appeals. Long ago, the defendants were offered a pre-trial community service resolution to this matter which would have secured their accountability and dismissed the charges. They declined the offer. It is unknown what additional steps the defendants will take at this time despite the clarity of the law,” District Attorney Todd Williams said. The opinion of the court No. COA24-92 may be found here