United States v. Steven Lefemine

── United States v. Steven Lefemine ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: May 01, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 24-4419 Doc: 58 Filed: 05/01/2026 Pg: 1 of 16 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-4419 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. STEVEN CLARK LEFEMINE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr, Senior District Judge. (3:23-cr-00117-JFA-1) Argued: September 12, 2025 Decided: May 1, 2026 Before KING, RUSHING, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Benjamin wrote the opinion, in which Judge King joined. Judge Rushing wrote a dissenting opinion. ARGUED: James Arthur Brown, Jr., LAW OFFICES OF JIM BROWN, P.A., Beaufort, South Carolina, for Appellant. Tommie DeWayne Pearson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Adair F. Boroughs, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. USCA4 Appeal: 24-4419 Doc: 58 Filed: 05/01/2026 Pg: 2 of 16 DEANDREA GIST BENJAMIN, Circuit Judge: In an anti-abortion protest, Steven Clark Lefemine blocked entry to a reproductive healthcare facility in Columbia, South Carolina. He was later charged with a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (the “FACE Act”). Lefemine requested a jury trial. The district court denied his request, as it determined that the constitutional right to a jury trial did not attach to the charged offense. Lefemine was subsequently found guilty at his bench trial. He now appeals to overturn his conviction. He contends that he was entitled to a jury trial because the indictment was not properly amended and that Congress intended for all FACE Act violators to have the right to a jury trial. We disagree on both fronts and uphold Lefemine’s conviction. I. A. In November 2022, Lefemine notified the City of Columbia police department (“CPD”) that he planned to visit Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (“PPSA”) to protest the provider’s abortion services. PPSA provides reproductive healthcare services, including abortions. Lefemine stated that he was protesting PPSA’s operations because he believes that life begins at conception, and abortions are murder. After notifying CPD, Lefemine went to PPSA and blocked entry to the building by sitting at the front entryway. PPSA’s manager asked him to move but Lefemine refused. The manager then told Lefemine that she would call the police. During this time, 2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-4419 Doc: 58 Filed: 05/01/2026 Pg: 3 of 16 individuals seeking PPSA services could not access care. CPD arrived on the scene around 15 minutes after the start of the incident and Lefemine was arrested without incident. Lefemine was subsequently charged with trespassing under South Carolina law. 1 B. In addition to the state law charge, a federal grand jury indicted Lefemine on one count of violating the FACE Act, 18 U.S.C. § 248. The FACE Act prohibits the use of force or threat of force or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, in