Attorneys for Forest Service burn boss want case moved to federal court
Published 11:00 am Tuesday, March 26, 2024
- A Forest Service crew member checks in with a contractor from Grayback Forestry as they monitor the fireline on the Starr 6 prescribed burn on Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2022.
PENDLETON — Lawyers for a Forest Service firefighter charged with reckless burning in Grant County Circuit Court are trying to move the trial to federal court instead.
Attorneys with the Angeli Law Group of Portland filed a motion on March 15 with the Pendleton division of the U.S. District Court for Oregon asking that the case against Forest Service burn boss Ricky Snodgrass be removed from the Grant County jurisdiction and placed in the hands of a federal judge.
Grant County Sheriff Todd McKinley arrested Snodgrass on Oct. 19, 2022, while he was supervising a prescribed burn in the Malheur National Forest near Bear Valley. Embers from the planned burn area blew across the Izee-Paulina Highway and charred close to 20 acres of timber and grazing land belonging to an adjacent private ranch before the blaze could be put out.
It is believed to be the first time a Forest Service firefighter has been arrested in the course of doing their job.
On Feb. 2 of this year, more than a year after his arrest, Snodgrass was indicted on a single misdemeanor count of reckless burning by a Grant County grand jury. He was arraigned in Grant County Circuit Court on Feb. 16 but has not yet entered a plea in the case. A plea hearing was scheduled for April 1, but Snodgrass’ attorneys have asked for that hearing to be postponed pending the outcome of their request to transfer the case to federal court.
The defense motion, called a notice of removal of state criminal prosecution, argues that U.S. District Court is the proper venue to try the case because Snodgrass is a federal employee who was acting in the course of his official duties when he was arrested. The so-called “Supremacy Clause” of the U.S. Constitution, the defense attorneys claim, gives federal officers immunity from state prosecution for activities performed in the course of duty if the officers’ conduct could be considered “necessary and proper.”
“Here,” the attorneys write in their motion, “Mr. Snodgrass intends to demonstrate that he and the other members of the team involved in the prescribed burn were following the burn plan and the direction of the Forest Supervisor and District Ranger and believed, based on years of experience and heavily audited standards and procedures, that the burn could be accomplished safely.”
Grant County District Attorney Jim Carpenter said he has not made up his mind whether to contest the defense’s efforts to have the case moved to U.S. District Court.
“I haven’t really decided yet,” Carpenter said. “That’s something I’m going to get into this week.”
At the same time, the DA acknowledged that Snodgrass’ attorneys have a strong argument for the change of venue based on the fact that their client was performing his duties as a federal employee at the time of his arrest on a state charge.
“It is probably more likely than not,” Carpenter said, “that removal to federal court will happen whether I fight it or not.”