Federal Land Element of Arson Statute Is Only Jurisdictional, but Mistake of Fact May Apply

US v. Evans: Evans set a fire that eventually burnt 70 acres of a national forest in North Carolina. He was charged with arson “on land owned by the United States.” Prior to trial, the Government moved in limine to exclude any testimony or evidence that Evans knew whether or not he was on federal land, arguing that the location element was merely jurisdiction. Evans argued that knowledge of federal ownership of the land was an element that included a scienter requirement. The district court sided with the Government, preventing Evans from testifying at trial that he thought the land where he started the fire belonged to his family (but abutted the national forest). Evans was convicted and sentenced to time served.

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit reversed Evans’ conviction. On the issue of the nature of the “on land owned by the United States” element, the court held that the district court had been correct – it was a jurisdictional element only and didn’t require proof of the defendant’s knowledge of the status of the land.  However, the court went on to conclude that a mistake of fact defense was available to Evans because the statute “requires that the defendant set the fire willfully – that is, with a bad purpose or with knowledge that his conduct is unlawful.” What makes the conduct unlawful is whether he willfully burned “the property of another – not whether the government owns the burned property.” Thus, a “defendant may attempt to negate the willfulness element by showing that he mistakenly believed he was not on federal land and had authorization to set the fire.” Because the district court prevented Evans from presenting such testimony, the court reversed his conviction.