He Was Charged With a Federal Offense for Running Up a Mountain
Michelino Sunseri broke the trail running record on Grand Teton but was prosecuted for "shortcutting" on a commonly used trail.
When mountain runner Michelino Sunseri climbed and descended Wyoming's Grand Teton in record time last year, he posted information about his route on social media. According to the Justice Department, Sunseri thereby implicated himself in a federal misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.
The National Park Service, which initially recommended that Sunseri be prosecuted for his seemingly inadvertent use of an unapproved trail, reconsidered that referral in May. But the U.S. Attorney's Office in Wyoming was unfazed. Its puzzling prosecutorial persistence provoked criticism from two members of the House Judiciary Committee, who said it epitomized "the problem of overcriminalization."
Reps. Harriet Hageman (R–Wyo.) and Andy Biggs (R–Ariz.) suggested that Sunseri's prosecution violated President Donald Trump's May 9 executive order urging restraint in deploying criminal penalties for regulatory violations. That order, Hageman and Biggs noted in a July 17 letter to Stephanie Sprecher, the acting U.S. attorney for Wyoming, expressed concern about "technical and unintentional regulatory violations that may expose individuals to criminal penalties for conduct they did not know was prohibited."
The fact that Sunseri advertised his route strongly suggests he did not realize he was breaking the law. And as WyoFile noted after Sunseri's bench trial in May, the path that the park service said he should not have taken is "a historic trail so well-used that it's become a skinny singletrack."
Cato Institute legal fellow Mike Fox notes that "only two tiny and ambiguous signs inform the public that the trail is off-limits." One of those signs, at the top of the trail, said "shortcutting causes erosion." The other sign, at the bottom of the trail, said "closed for regrowth."
Defense attorney Ed Bushnell argued that Sunseri was not "shortcutting," since he was using a long-established trail. Bushnell added that it was unclear whether the "closed" notice referred to the area around the sign or the trail beyond it. "There is no clear prohibition there," Bushnell said. "This is not conspicuous signage."
After Sunseri was cited for using a prohibited trail, Hageman and Biggs said, he "took responsibility for his actions, expressed regret, and volunteered to help officially close the alternate path, which receives regular foot traffic." Federal prosecutors filed criminal charges anyway, and their plea deal offers were onerous given the nature of the violation.
Sunseri's case illustrates the traps set by a code of federal regulations so vast and obscure that even experts can only guess at the number of criminal penalties it authorizes—at least 300,000, they think. While hacking away at that thicket of prohibitions is a daunting task, the least federal prosecutors can do in the meantime is exercise some commonsense discretion.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "6 Months in Jail for Mountain Running?."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Nobody is above the law.
If only they had thrown the book at Kate Bush instead
Except god and Trump!
Dude used a trail that was clearly signed "closed for regrowth". Unless his argument is that he is too stupid to know how to read he is guilty.
And it should be CRIMINAL violation to ignore that sign? Give me a fucking break.
You want a break for fucking? Next you'll want lunch time off.
Considering the damage from trail erosion that occurs out west, yes. If he ignored a sign and decided to use the trail then he should be charged for it.
I think the bears, deer, and mountain goats that use that game trail should also be liable. Placing one’s footsteps on an established path is clearly criminal and justifies a stiff penalty. Send them all to the zoo.
The argument is that is was not "clearly" signed. Which I find quite plausible, at least.
Notice that the story doesn't include a picture of the sign.
I think gaia can handle any 'damage' he may have caused.... get a life!
re: "clearly signed"
Not just no but hell, no. "Close for regrowth" is something you say to protect the vegetation off the trail. The trail itself is not going to 'regrow' for decades. (Note: This is less true for east-coast trails with high precipitation. But this trail was in the Grand Tetons.) If you truly want to close the trail, you do so not just with a sign but also with a gate or other physical barrier - and the sign on that barrier. That's how the Parks Service does that in thousands of other places. They know how to close a trail and this wasn't it.
And, by the way, prior articles here at Reason have included pictures of the trail sign. It's also in the court filings. It's not that hard to find.
The article mentions that it wasn't clear what was "closed" so your argument is based on disputed facts.
Should the two prior posters be given the benefit of the doubt and be taken as sarcastic, or should we condemn them for being incredibly obtuse? To the first I grant clemency, but the second sounds like he means it.
Point being (in case you missed it) that minor transgressions should not literally become a federal case.
But did he break any immigration laws?
JS;dr
JS;dr
Scumby the Chimp-Chump is in FAVOR of Government Almighty SEVERELY punishing minor, unwitting offenses!!!
Twat an UDDER slurprise!!!
Hey Scumby the Chimp-Chump! Snot only did I SNOT read JS, I also did SNOT read the Bible, Leo Fool’s-Toy, the writings of Hairy Pothead, Little Women, Little Penises, Little Women with Penises, Hairy TurtleDove, Hairy TurtleShit, “For Whom the Trolls Belt Out Lies” and “The Old Man and the Sleaze”, by Ernest Spamming-Way, Shakespeare, TenTiredTurtlesInATuttle-TuttleTree, “When Hairy Met Slutty” by Queen Spermy Daniels, Charles DickHead, OhThePlacesI-SwillGo; M. Scott Peckish, Sam-I-Am Harris, Zen, Feng Shui and The Farts of Motorcycle Cuntinence, Whores and Peace, Snores and Fleas, “On the Origin of Feces”, The Bhagavad Gita, Ulysses, Pussy Riot, For Whores The Bells Toll, or even “Sam I Am”!!!
So I am INFINITELY more ignorant that YOU, Oh Pervfectly Ignorant and IgnorCunt Jane, You SLUT!!! Bow Low NOW, Scumby the Chimp-Chump, You Ignorant Slut!!! Or "up" Your lame game!
JS;dr
No. Cutting. Switchbacks.
We mean it!
Is that as bad as democracy-threatening insurrections? Will violators be shot?
I long was a fan of the National Park Service, and enjoyed visiting both natural and historic parks. And I appreciate the challenges of their conflicting mission to preserve some special places while also providing for visitor enjoyment.
But I have met too many NPS staff who prioritize the preservation of "their" parks. And who also have liberal political agendas and promote those in their quest to "educate" the public. And with the current shut down I see a repeat of when parks closed in 2018-19, as park staff used their authority to "resist". And behind all of this is the constant effort to create more parks, and give them control of more land.
Enough.
So jacob...
The Wyoming prosecutors here are wrong for ignoring trumps exec order... but you've also praised the d.c. prosecutors refusing to prosecute comey and others. Is it about the who?
At least you acknowledged trumps EO to stop this bullshit.
Didn't everyone who went up that trail with strata turned on implicate themselves? Where are the federal charges for the other 10k visitors to that trail?
Why did I have to google to find the most important piece of information about this whole story? Why is this not included above?
On Tuesday, Sept. 2, 2025, exactly one year after the controversial run, federal magistrate judge Stephanie A. Hambrick ruled Sunseri guilty of leaving a designated trail in Grand Teton National Park.
What was the sentence? Was he imprisoned?
I suppose he should have taken the trail with him?
You are on to something Reason should have started with. Now Trump can pardon him.
A member of the public using public lands?
How dare he?!
Time to sell off a huge portion of the "federal" lands and apply the proceeds to debt reduction.
^THIS!
The man who ran up a hill, and came down with a mountain of legal bills.
The photo looks like it was from Grindr
Jacob perhaps found it there.
Since it was taken by another guy it probably is.
I wonder if dumbass Michelino Sunseri could read the signs, "Do Not Enter" that were placed around the mountain?
No?
Then he's either an illiterate (thank you American public education), or he trespassed intentionally.
Either way, I have no sympathy for this arrogant turd.
Sure. We must keep out of our public lands.
Oh, and trust the experts.
yeah - i was confuse by that ... trespass on public land? few enough people adventure into the outdoors - this idiotic prosecution incentivizes the crazed eco-granola crowd that are attracted to the park service jobs.
And forget about the amazing physical human achievement he accomplished... he may have stepped on some weeds!!
Sorry your confused so here is an explanation. All of the public lands and trails were not closed. One was for restoration purposes, was marked closed and the guy ignored it. Carry on.
500 dollar fine, move on.