{"id":1933,"date":"2009-02-11T09:36:02","date_gmt":"2008-03-31T09:19:40","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-03-31T09:19:40","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=1933","title":{"rendered":"ID:  Reasonable expectation of privacy found in a camouflaged hooch in a forest; &#8220;worthy&#8221; v. &#8220;unworthy&#8221; living quarters argument rejected"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Idaho finds a reasonable expectation of privacy in a camouflaged hooch in a National Forest because he had a subjective expectation of privacy in a temporary dwelling, and even a temporary dwelling is entitled to constitutional protection. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.isc.idaho.gov\/opinions\/pruss.pdf\">State v. Pruss<\/a>, 145 Idaho 623, 181 P.3d 1231 (2008):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The first inquiry under the two-part test is an issue of fact. Did Pruss have a subjective expectation of privacy in his hooch? The district court found that he did. That finding is supported by substantial and competent evidence. Pruss attempted to camouflage his hooch so that it would not be readily observable. More significantly, one can certainly infer that a person has a subjective expectation of privacy in his dwelling, even if it is a temporary structure like a tent, travel trailer, or the hooch in this case.<\/p>\n<p>The second inquiry is an issue of law. Is society willing to recognize Pruss&#8217;s expectation of privacy as being reasonable? Stated differently, &#8220;the correct inquiry is whether the government&#8217;s intrusion infringes upon the personal and societal values protected by the Fourth Amendment.&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=466&amp;invol=170\"><em>Oliver v. United States<\/em><\/a>, 466 U.S. 170, 182-83, 104 S. Ct. 1735, 80 L. Ed. 2d 214 (1984).<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;[N]either history nor this Nation&#8217;s experience requires us to disregard the overriding respect for the sanctity of the home that has been embedded in our traditions since the origins of the Republic.&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=445&amp;invol=573\"><em>Payton v. New York<\/em><\/a>, 445 U.S. 573, 601, 100 S. Ct. 1371, 63 L. Ed. 2d 639 (1980). The respect for the sanctity of the home does not depend upon whether it is a mansion or hut, or whether it is a permanent or a temporary structure. As stated eloquently by William Pitt, &#8220;&#8216;The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter&#8211;all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!'&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=357&amp;invol=301\"><em>Miller v. United States<\/em><\/a>, 357 U.S. 301, 307, 78 S. Ct. 1190, 2 L. Ed. 2d 1332 (1958) (quoting remarks attributed to William Pitt).<\/p>\n<p>A structure need not be one&#8217;s &#8220;home&#8221; in order for the occupant to have a legitimate expectation of privacy there. <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=495&amp;invol=91\"><em>Minnesota v. Olson<\/em><\/a>, 495 U.S. 91, 96, 110 S. Ct. 1684, 109 L. Ed. 2d 85 (1990). &#8220;&#8216;[T]he Fourth Amendment protects people, not places,&#8217; and provides sanctuary for citizens wherever they have a legitimate expectation of privacy.&#8221; <em>Id.<\/em> at 96 n.5.<\/p>\n<p>Throughout our State&#8217;s history, its citizens have engaged in various types of outdoor recreational activities on public lands. Idaho&#8217;s first game laws were enacted by the Territorial Legislature in 1864. Idaho&#8217;s state park system will celebrate its centennial this year. While engaging in outdoor recreational activities on public lands, our citizens often use various types of portable shelters such as backpacking tents, wall tents, tent trailers, and travel trailers. The central purpose of the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures forecloses any distinction between such types of shelters. See, <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=456&amp;invol=798\"><em>United States v. Ross<\/em><\/a>, 456 U.S. 798, 822, 102 S. Ct. 2157, 72 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1982) (&#8220;a constitutional distinction between &#8216;worthy&#8217; and &#8216;unworthy&#8217; containers would be improper&#8221;). If the travel trailer is protected against government intrusion, then so is the tent.<\/p>\n<p>Utilizing public lands for outdoor recreational activities is a longstanding custom in this State that is recognized as valuable to society. For example, on May 1, 2007, the Governor of Idaho issued a proclamation declaring June 2007 to be &#8220;Great Outdoors Month&#8221; and &#8220;invit[ing] citizens to observe this month by taking advantage of the many opportunities our state offers for family outdoor recreation activities.&#8221; As the Governor recognized in his proclamation, &#8220;[O]utdoor activities contribute to the physical well-being and happiness of the people of the state.&#8221; We hold that a person using a temporary shelterFN2 on public lands as his or her living quarters has a reasonable expectation of privacy in that shelter and that the government may not intrude into the shelter without a search warrant, absent an exception to the warrant requirement.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>2. By &#8220;temporary,&#8221; we mean not permanent. Temporary does not refer to the length of time the person utilizes the temporary shelter as his or her abode.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The court&#8217;s press release is <a href=\"http:\/\/www.isc.idaho.gov\/opinions\/prussNR.pdf\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=1933\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1933","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1933","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1933"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1933\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}