Michelino Sunseri’s case has been controversial among outdoor enthusiasts. But newly released information reveals that it’s also been divisive among the government agencies involved in it.
The 32-year-old California endurance runner is being charged by the Department of the Interior (DOI) with ignoring posted signage to take a prohibited shortcut, after he cut a switchback during a fastest known time (FKT) attempt on Grand Teton. Sunseri is facing a 5-year ban from Grand Teton National Park (GTNP) and as much as a $5,000 fine.
However, on May 19, Frank Lands, deputy director of the NPS, sent an email to DOI lawyers stating, “We believe that the previously offered punishment, a five-year ban and fine, is an overcriminalization based on the gravity of the offense. Therefore, we withdraw our support.”
Sunseri’s two-way bench trial proceeded, nevertheless, on May 20 and 21, 2025. But his defense was not notified of NPS’s decision. It was only revealed following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by Sunseri’s legal team in the days afterward.
Now, Sunseri’s lawyers are arguing that the fairness of the trial has been undermined.
Michelino Sunseri: An Example of ‘Overcriminalization’?
The NPS decision to revoke its support follows an executive order signed by President Trump on May 9, targeting “overcriminalization in federal regulations.” The order aims to “ensure no American is transformed into a criminal for violating a regulation they have no reason to know exists.”
The email chain, which was shared with GearJunkie on June 6, raises questions about whether the prosecutors in Sunseri’s case met constitutional obligations to share information that could have been helpful for his defense. Sources close to the case also allege that it seems to reveal that the Justice Department is not complying with Trump’s executive order.
In the emails obtained by Sunseri’s legal team, Damon Hagan, the advisor to the DOI solicitor, mentioned Trump’s executive order twice. It was not directly cited as the reason that NPS revoked its support for the Sunseri case, but it was referenced as the subject of meetings directly prior to Deputy Director Lands’ email to the DOI notifying them of NPS’s withdrawn support for the case.
In a motion filed on June 6, Sunseri’s defense said that the prosecution’s failure to share information regarding NPS’s decision “undermin[ed] the fundamental fairness of Mr. Sunseri’s trial.”
Cutting a Switchback? Or Using an Old Trail?
Sunseri finished his FKT attempt on Grand Teton on September 2, 2024, sprinting from the trailhead to the summit and back in just 2 hours, 50 minutes, and 50 seconds. He published his route publicly online, and fastestknowntime.com (the unofficial record keeper for FKTs) acknowledged that he had beaten the previous record by 3 minutes and 12 seconds.
However, 16 days later, his FKT was revoked when it was revealed that he’d cut a switchback using an old climbers’ trail. This shortcut was allegedly frequented by tour guides and used by previous FKT holders during their attempts on Grand Teton.
When Sunseri used this route, he bypassed two small signs, one reading “Closed for Restoration” and the other reading “Shortcutting Switchbacks Causes Erosion.”
It wasn’t long before GTNP rangers officially charged Sunseri with violating 36 CFR 21(b). That code states that a park superintendent “may restrict hiking or pedestrian use to a designated trail or walkway system.”
Sunseri’s legal team said that despite the two signs, it was not clear that this trail was closed. Ed Bushnell, Sunseri’s defense attorney, argued further that there is a strict process for closing trails in national parks. It requires the park superintendent to make a written determination and notify the public using conspicuous signs, maps, even a newspaper publication, and printing/posting in the park’s media.
During the trial, Bushnell said of the old climber’s trail, “There is no clear prohibition there. This is not conspicuous signage.”
‘Undermining Fundamental Fairness’
The motion filed by Sunseri’s legal team argues that they should have been notified of NPS’s decision to withdraw its support of Sunseri’s case prior to the trial. They cite the 1963 case Brady v. Maryland, in which the Supreme Court held that it is a criminal defendant’s due process right to see evidence “material” relevant to their guilt and/or punishment.
The prosecution “had access to this email [from Lands] before trial,” Sunseri’s legal team wrote in the motion, and yet, they “decided not to disclose it to the defense, despite its clear relevance to DOJ authorization, defense strategy and witness impeachment.”
Had they known about it prior to the trial, Sunseri’s legal team alleged they would have called additional witnesses, including NPS Public Affairs Officer Emily Davis.
“The timing and content of the withheld communication raise serious constitutional questions,” the motion reads, “and go directly to the integrity of the prosecution and the fairness of the trial.”
There is no estimate for when the judge in Sunseri’s case will release the verdict. GearJunkie will continue reporting on this story as it develops.
Read the full article here