California v. Greenwood - Significance, A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy, Should The Fourth Amendment Protect Garbage?, Impact
petitioner curb court decision
Petitioner
State of California
Respondent
Billy Greenwood
Petitioner's Claim
That a warrantless search and seizure of garbage placed at the curb for pickup does not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Michael J. Pear
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Michael Ian Garey
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)
Justices Dissenting
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall (Anthony M. Kennedy did not participate)
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
16 May 1988
Decision
Reversed the California Court of Appeal decision and ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage placed on the curb for collection.
Related Cases
- People v. Krivda, 5 Cal.3d 357 (1971).
- United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974).
- State v. Hauser, 342 N.C. 382 (1976).
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984).
Further Readings
- Sanders, Alain L. "Lifting the Lid on Garbage." Time, May 30, 1988.
- Shanoff, Barry. "Garbage is Public Property on Curb." World Wastes, June 1998, p. 74.
- Uviller, H. Richard. "The Fourth Amendment: Does it Protect Your Garbage?" The Nation, October 10, 1988.
User Comments
almost 5 years ago
if the trash collector was suspicious of something then he has every right to report it to the police. I also say that it wasnt billy greenwood's property anymore becasue he threw it out to have the trash collectors to take away so the police had ever right to check the bags and something was in the bags that he didnt want people to see because they were in a dark green trash bags
almost 2 years ago
Once someone disposes of something, in essence dispossessing themselves of the property itself, the issue of 'privacy' is moot. When a person tosses something away to be collected by a sanitation agency that something is rightly considered 'trash' or 'garbage' and thus contains no inherent 'right' to anything. There can be no valid , objective law concerning privacy 'rights' to dispossessed property.
almost 3 years ago
i think the cops had every right to go through his trash. it was set out on the curb for a complete stranger (the garbage man) to pick up. know of a lot of people that go out on garbage nights and look through people's trash, not the bags, but other things that they have sitting out there waitting to go. a bag is no different.
12 months ago
i think they are all f***'d up they have no rite !!!!!
over 3 years ago
I belive that the police had no right to search through the trash. See since it was on the curb and not the sidewalk, which the curb is his propety therefore making it illigal to search. So since they did they found the narrcotics, got a search warent and found more. So he is guilty but the police are guilty as well
almost 4 years ago
i think that cops are violating the fourth amendment all time. they are doing illegal seaches when they have no probable cause