Which scenario describes criminal trespass on a public amusement property?

Criminal trespass on public amusement property specifically involves not just the act of entering the property but also the manner in which someone interacts with or behaves on that property. In this scenario, disrupting an event after receiving notice qualifies as criminal trespass because it indicates that the individual has been warned about their behavior and chooses to disregard that warning. This disregard for established rules or conditions demonstrates a clear violation of the expectations for conduct on that property, which is essential under criminal trespass laws.

In this context, remaining on property without permission could indicate a trespass, but it lacks the element of disruption or the conscious choice to ignore rules after being informed. Entering a private area with intent also does not directly describe the situation within a public amusement setting where the focus is on disruption. Eviction from the premises without notice might result in a civil matter regarding property rights and management but does not accurately embody the definition of criminal trespass in the context provided, as it does not address the behavior expected of individuals within the amusement space.