By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Stietz's convictions in armed standoff upheld
Placeholder Image
MADISON - A state appeals court Thursday upheld a Gratiot man's convictions for resisting arrest and pointing a firearm at conservation wardens when he confronted them during the 2012 deer hunting season.

Robert F. Stietz, 67, unsuccessfully challenged the jury verdicts on grounds including he acted in self-defense; was denied his Second Amendment right to bear arms; the wardens were trespassing on his property; and he was denied a public trial when a pre-trial conference was held behind closed doors.

Stietz testified that he was walking his fenced property in the Lafayette County Town of Lamont after sundown on Nov. 25, 2012 looking for trespassers. He saw two men wearing blaze orange vests. Stietz contended that wardens, Joseph Frost and Nick Webster, failed to adequately identify themselves.

Stietz said he feared for his life when the two men asked for the rifle he was carrying and he should have been allowed at trial to argue his efforts to resist their orders constituted self-defense.

The argument did not convince the District IV Court of Appeals who concluded that the wardens were wearing their uniforms and Stietz heard one radio for backup help when he hit Frost in the stomach with the butt of the rifle.

As Webster and Stietz struggled for control of the rifle, Frost also grabbed it, wrestled it free from the two men and ended up with it while lying on his back. Stietz then reached for his handgun, as did Webster and Frost.

As Frost stood up, Stietz continued to point the handgun in Webster's direction with his finger inside the trigger guard, the hammer cocked and Stietz's thumb on the hammer.

Stietz did not lower the handgun until a sheriff's deputy arrived and did not drop the weapon until other authorities arrived sometime later.

The appeals court found that Stietz did not produce enough evidence to warrant the jury be instructed to consider if Stietz had acted in self-defense.

The appeals court also dismissed Stietz's claim the wardens were trespassing. Instead, the court found that the wardens had reasonable suspicion that somebody may have been hunting illegally as they saw a car where hunters normally park. Inside the vehicle they saw an empty gun case and because it was 15 minutes past sundown, had a legitimate reason to investigate if someone was violating hunting regulations at that hour.

The District IV Court also threw out Stietz's argument that he was denied a public trial when Judge James Beer held a pre-trial jury instruction conference in a courthouse conference room instead of a courtroom.

The appeals court ruled that even if the conference was closed to the public it did not "invoke the types of concerns underlying one's public trial right," according to the unsigned 11-page opinion.

Stietz and his attorney were at the conference; spectators were welcome; and the door was closed only to permit the court reporter to better hear the proceedings, according to the opinion.

Stietz also contended the wardens violated his Second Amendment rights when they forcibly disarmed him. That Constitutional violation would require the District IV Court to vacate his convictions, Stietz's attorney, Charles Giesen, of Madison, argued.

The appeals court disagreed. It found the wardens had reasonable suspicion to stop and question Stietz. When Stietz pointed his weapon at them, they believed Stietz posed a threat to their safety, and they could temporarily disarm him without violating the Second Amendment.

In May 2014, Beer placed Stietz on three years extended supervisor with one year to be served in prison.

He had a May 24, 2015, maximum release date from prison, according online records.

A call to Giesen for comment on the opinion was not returned before deadline.