{"id":3153,"date":"2009-06-04T05:31:36","date_gmt":"2009-05-25T23:00:41","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2009-05-26T05:13:26","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=3153","title":{"rendered":"WY: Failing to provide a basis for state constitutional review of RS, the court considers it under the Fourth Amendment"},"content":{"rendered":"

In raising a state constitutional challenge to a search and seizure, defendant has to “‘provide a precise, analytically sound approach when advancing’ such a claim.” Feeney v. State<\/a>, 2009 WY 67, 2009 Wyo. LEXIS 63 (May 21, 2009):<\/p>\n

[*P11] The appellant raises his claim under both the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1 \u00a7 4 of the Wyoming Constitution. We have said that when a litigant endeavors to interpret the Wyoming Constitution independent of the Federal Constitution, the litigant “must provide a precise, analytically sound approach when advancing” such a claim. Vasquez v. State, 990 P.2d 476, 484 (Wyo. 1999) (citing Dworkin v. L.F.P., Inc., 839 P.2d 903, 909 (Wyo. 1992)). Six factors must be analyzed when a separate state constitutional claim has been raised: 1) the textual language; 2) the differences in the text; 3) constitutional history; 4) preexisting state law; 5) structural differences; and 6) matters of particular state or local concern. Saldana v. State, 846 P.2d 604, 621-24 (Wyo. 1993) (Golden, J., concurring).<\/p>\n

[*P12] The appellant’s attempt to present an independent state constitutional claim falls short. Although he mentions the above-cited factors, he fails to analyze any of them, or even generally describe how Article 1 \u00a7 4 might provide him greater protection than the Fourth Amendment. We will therefore confine our analysis to the Fourth Amendment.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Here, defendant “falls short” in his argument. Reasonable suspicion was provided by defendant’s excessive nervousness and the clear differences between the car rental agreement and his travel plans which made no sense.<\/p>\n

[Posted 5\/26\/09]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/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-3153","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3153","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=3153"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3153\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3153"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3153"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3153"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}