NCJ Number
14112
Journal
Wisconsin Law Review Volume: 1974 Issue: 1 Dated: (1974) Pages: 212-227
Date Published
1974
Length
16 pages
Annotation
A 1973 CALIFORNIA CASE HOLDING THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OF THE DEFENDANT'S TRASH WITHOUT A WARRANT WAS INVALID AND SUGGESTING THAT TRADITIONAL NATIONS OF ABANDONNED PROPERTY DO NOT APPLY TO TRASH.
Abstract
THE ISSUE OF ABANDONMENT IS USUALLY RAISED WHEN THE POLICE LACK PROBABLE CAUSE OR A SEARCH WARRANT. BUT, AUTHORITIES DIFFER AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TRASH DEPOSITED IN WASTE CANS IS ABANDONED PROPERTY. IF ABANDONED, AN OBJECT IS SUBJECT TO SEIZURE WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE OR A SEARCH WARRANT. ALTHOUGH CASES REVEAL DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE PROBLEM, THERE IS AGREEMENT THAT APPLICATION OF THE ABANDONMENT DOCTRINE REQUIRES BOTH A SHOWING OF INTENT TO ABANDON, AS WELL AS A SHOWING THAT THE POLICE HAD PROPER ACCESS TO THE RECOVERED TRASH. THE TRADITIONAL LAW OF ABANDONMENT FAILS WHEN APPLIED TO THE CONTENTS OF TRASH CANS. AN INDIVIDUAL DOES NOT REASONABLY EXPECT THAT HIS TRASH WILL BE FREELY EXAMINED BY HIS NEIGHBORS OR THE POLICE. LOCAL ORDINANCES, COMMONLY REFELT THIS EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY. INDEED, APPLICATION OF THE TEST OF KATZ V. UNITED STATES SHOWS THAT THE INTENT TO ABANDON TRASH SHOULD REST NOT MERELY ON AN INDIVIDUAL'S OUTWARD ACTS, BUT RATHER ON HIS REASONABLE EXPECTATIONS OF PRIVACY. IT FOLLOWS, FIRST, THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE THE DISTINCTION DRAWN IN KRIVDA THAT ABANDONMENT IS NOT ALWAYS ABSOLUTE, SINCE PRIVACY AS WELL AS PROPERTY IS INVOLVED. SECOND, WHERE THE POLICE, IN ADVANCE, SEEK THE COOPERATION OF REFUSE COLLECTORS, THE ACTUAL SEIZURE OCCURS WHEN THE TRASH IS PICKED UP, EVEN THOUGH THE TRASH MAY BE EXAMINED ELSEWHERE.