capitol mall and other state property and facilities — camping prohibited.
No person shall camp on or in any state-owned or leased property or facility including, but not limited to, the capitol mall, except those that are designated as a recreational camping ground, area or facility. The provisions of this section shall not apply or affect policies, rules, statutes or leases on endowment lands, department of parks and recreation lands or department of fish and game lands. For the purposes of this section, the term "camp" or "camping" means to use as a temporary or permanent place of dwelling, lodging or living accommodation, and which indicia of camping may include, but are not limited to, storing personal belongings, using tents or other temporary structures for storing personal belongings or for sleeping, carrying on cooking activities, laying out bedding or making any fire. Any person who violates the provisions of this section shall be guilty of an infraction. Such persons shall be required to remove all their personal property from the state-owned or leased property.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2012–2023 · leading case:
Watters v. Otter, 854 F. Supp. 2d 823 (D. Idaho 2012).
Watters v. Otter, 854 F. Supp. 2d 823 (D. Idaho 2012).
· cites it 10× “[to] be disposed of____” See Idaho Code § 67-1613 . The bill contained an emergency clause declaring that an “emergency existfed]” and providing that it would go into “full force and effect on and after its passage and approval.”
Watters v. Otter, 955 F. Supp. 2d 1178 (D. Idaho 2013).
· cites it 22× “I.C. § 67-1613. The law also authorizes the State to “remove any unauthorized personal property” and consider it as “litter .”
Fitzpatrick v. Little (D. Idaho 2023).
· cites it 23× “Additionally, as the Officials point out, “Idaho’s statutory scheme for trespass is wholly separate from Idaho Code § 67-1613 .” Dkt. 17, at 4. This distinctly distinguishes the ordinances in Martin and Johnson from Idaho’s anti-camping statute.”
Watters v. Otter, 26 F. Supp. 3d 1014 (D. Idaho 2014).
· cites it 2× “2 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Occupy seeks a partial judgment declaring that (1) the State’s policy of enforcing Idaho Code §§ 67-1613 and 67-1613A to remove Occupy’s tents violates Occupy’s First Amendment rights, and (2) in the future, the State must enforce the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.