Here is the text from the opinion on the matter, and you tell me if this is a real protection:
But, of course, “society” has already decided that you have no reasonable privacy interest in what you’ve discarded…
…which, again, before anyone decides again that I am arguing against this case, I find perfectly acceptable. All I ask is them to tell me how I can reasonably protect my interest in a manner befitting the fourth amendment’s other protections.
I feel like this is an analogous situation: copiers around the world have a feature which allows them to remember the last thousand sheets copied. Since anything you copy, you could have accidentally left at the copier, you don’t have an expectation of privacy there, so cops can search the history any time they want, including at doctor’s offices. Oh, and by the way, you are forbidden from disabling this feature, because it saves a lot of trees or heartache or something.
Clearly, the hypothetical trash service should supply customers with locking receptacles in which to place their trash between pick-up days. I’m far from a legal expert, but breaking or picking a lock isn’t something cops generally do without a warrant. Not if they want anything they collect to be admissable, anyway. Further, locked-up trash wouldn’t be abandoned, would it?
Even if you can’t burn the trash, chemical treatment (e.g. spraying some bleach into each trash bag before closing it up, and not putting it out onto the public streets until the bleach has had at least a few hours to work) ought to break down DNA traces. It can even be innocuously explained as a way to control the odor of trash containers that aren’t yet full enough to take out of the house. I actually do so myself (for the latter reason – MrsMB has some sort of weird olfactory malfunction that causes her to misperceive the sweet aroma of old coffee grounds as if it were some sort of foul stench).
You’ll have to upgrade to a private trash removal service that destroys your trash, or so thoroughly mixes it in with other trash as to destroy any probative value it might have.
I’m sorry, but—what follows is a question of your interpretation of the law, by the way—do you believe that actually would bring constitutional protections back into play? The case in question reads to me like the very fact you consider it trash renders you completely helpless (reference the quote I give in response to Scumpup’s post). The expectation that it was in a closed container and would be picked up by a garbage man and mixed with others’ trash was not important at all to the majority opinion. Thanks for any clarification there on your opinion.
The protections it brings into play are practical ones. The police cannot garner any useful information from your trash if it is taken and destroyed, or taken and held until mixed in with large amounts of other trash.
The fact that it is trash destined for a landfill/incinerator is less important than it being left unattended on the roadside waiting for a third party to take it away.
I’ve hired private trash hauling, and the guy comes with his truck, takes the stuff from my house, and drives away. At no point was the trash unattended, or abandoned, ownership was transferred directly from one party to another. Once transferred, your secure disposal company owns the stuff, and won’t let the cops take a look without a warrant.
Well the problem is that some states have apparently decided that trash left on the curb is protected from government intrusion, but trash picked up by the collector is not. (Probably under some kind of consent once removed kind of thing—I don’t know the justification, only the result.) I’m not aware of any ruling or law anywhere which suggests there is a special legal class of trash collectors. Trash isn’t property, so could this party refuse the police? Someone picks up the trash and once picked up by a third party and it seems at that point everywhere in the union all bets are off. I doubt the law of the land’s position is that third parties can create rights that don’t exist, so I don’t think this special trash collection is a protection. Again—trying to clarify the issue. Thanks for any insight.
They might find DNA, it might even match the DNA recovered from some other crime scene - but proving that it is ‘your’ DNA is another story and would require a valid warrant (assuming that the item that provided came from a trash bin and not something that the cops saw you dispose personally).
After all, the trash bin is in public, others can dispose of items there, and they have no way to testify that the item that provided it was placed there by you.
In short - its a waste of time in most cases - if they have probable cause to suspect you, then they will get the warrant (or atleast should) and get the sample they need in a usable fashion.
And that is where things diverge - anymore tv shows demonstrate and real live cops look for ways to get around getting warrants - and to me, that’s the bigger issue.
Does trash have to be at the curb to be abandoned?
My trash bins are beside my house, on my property. On trash day, the trash guy comes onto my property, takes the can to the truck, and empties it.
Would the police be able to come onto my property to go through the trash? Would it matter when they did so? Would they be able to intercept the trash guy on the way to the truck?
Attempt to find a web page of a compilation of state rulings on it, then look one up.
Yes. some state constitution’s forbid what the SC permits. Just as a few states forbid DUI checkpoints.
While Ohio’s search and seizure provision has been ruled “co-exetensive” with the 4th AM, not all 4th AM jurisprudence is permitted under our Constitution.
When the SC New London Eminent Domain case was handed down, some states specifically codified this was not permissable in thier state.
Actually, I have to apologize. The scenario I’m discussing is basically exactly the court case I linked to, which I didn’t realize until I read the dissent.
The other way in question, given by internal citation, suggests that burning trash is unlawful.
So: I apologize for not researching first. In fact my scenario is exactly the case in question. I guess that settles any legal question. So much for refusal to submit DNA.
Definitely I think you have that right. However, I also think that if police can collect the DNA evidence against you via some method allowed under the fourth amendment then I don’t view it as them forcing you to submit to a DNA test. I also fully believe you have the right to refuse to answer police questions. However, if a police officer surreptitiously follows you to a meeting with a co-conspirator being held in a public place, and overhears a conversation implicating you in a crime, I don’t feel that is a violation of your fourth amendment rights.
What constitutionally protected right? The right to not have things you discard be searched? You said “So you don’t think you should have the right to refuse to submit to a DNA sample without a warrant?” My answer is: No, I think you do have that right. Acquisition of a DNA sample through means that do not involve you submitting to a test, and do not involve a government search or seizure of yourself or your fourth amendment protected property is not covered under that right.
Practically speaking, is it a problem that we live in a society in which you have the right to refuse to actively submit a DNA sample without a warrant, but it is difficult or impossible to prevent the sending of some of your DNA out with the trash which is difficult or impossible to restrict from police custody?
Yes, it’s a problem for some people. I don’t see it as a fourth amendment problem, though. And I think the people who it is a problem for should probably be very interested in the “better lock” type options for sanitizing their trash or disposing of their trash surreptitiously.
Inapposite. It’s not trash any more. It’s not abandoned. You are specifically hiring them to take your stuff and destroy it, or mingle it, and until that happens its not abandoned.
