Federal kidnapping can start before a car reaches the border

In the First Circuit, a ride that begins with consent does not get a permanent pass. The court said a traveler can withdraw permission mid-trip, and if the other person keeps driving anyway, federal kidnapping liability under 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1) can still attach before anyone reaches the state line.

That matters most in coercive domestic-violence and abduction cases, where the trip itself can become part of the abuse. The panel said consent is not set in stone; once it is withdrawn, the other person has to accept that decision.

Why this case mattered

The ruling came in Stephen Pilson’s federal case. He was convicted of kidnapping his then-girlfriend, Rilka Stefanov, and of violating a protective order across state lines.

The conduct began in October 2019 and continued through December 2019, after Pilson was released from a Massachusetts jail following similar offenses involving the same victim. That backdrop gave the court a concrete example of a ride that can become unlawful when the other person wants out.

What changes for future cases

Pilson challenged the kidnapping conviction as unsupported by the evidence, and he also challenged the jury instructions tied to the interstate protective-order charge under 18 U.S.C. § 2262(a)(1), the federal law covering interstate violations of domestic-violence stay-away orders. The First Circuit said the consent question turns on how the trip unfolded, not just on how it started.

For prosecutors, that gives a cleaner theory in cases where a ride shifts from voluntary to coercive before the border. For defense lawyers, it is a warning that consent can disappear in the middle of a trip, and the legal risk can follow the driver from that point forward.