{"id":63718,"date":"2026-03-28T10:51:51","date_gmt":"2026-03-28T15:51:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=63718"},"modified":"2026-03-28T12:21:22","modified_gmt":"2026-03-28T17:21:22","slug":"or-a-year-of-public-internet-portal-monitoring-required-a-warrant-under-or-const","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=63718","title":{"rendered":"OR: A year of public internet portal monitoring required a warrant under OR Const."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A year of monitoring of internet use at a public portal where the company providing the portal cooperated with the police was state action. \u201c[T]he state’s year-long surveillance of defendant’s internet activities was a search under Article I, section 9.\u201d 255,723 webpage visits were viewed by the state without a warrant. State v. Simons<\/a>, 375 Or. 70 (Mar. 26, 2026), rev\u2019g 329 Ore. App. 506, 508, 540 P.3d 1130 (2023):<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n

Defendant accessed the internet via a publicly accessible wireless (Wi-Fi) network operated by a local business, A&W, for the benefit of its visitors. To connect to that network, visitors were required to acknowledge a terms-of-service provision that included statements that, although A&W did not “actively monitor” the network, users could be suspended from the network for improper activity, and that A&W “may cooperate with legal authorities,” including “disclosing communications and activities * * * in response to lawful requests by governmental authorities, including * * * judicial orders.” Alerted to suspicious activity by A&W, the police used the business to monitor defendant’s internet traffic. Over the course of a year, without a warrant, the state tracked 255,723 of defendant’s webpage visits. Defendant was eventually arrested for and later convicted on charges of encouraging child sexual abuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On defendant’s appeal, the Court of Appeals held that “defendant did not have a constitutionally protected privacy interest under the circumstances, so no ‘search’ occurred.” State v. De Witt Simons, 329 Ore. App. 506, 508, 540 P3d 1130 (2023). We allowed defendant’s petition for review and now hold that the mere fact that a person accesses the internet through a public network does not eliminate the Article I, section 9, right to privacy that exists for one’s internet browsing activities. Nor do terms-of-service provisions such as were present here eliminate that right to privacy. Finally, we hold that the trial court was correct to conclude that the coordinated effort between A&W and law enforcement to monitor defendant for a year constituted state action. Accordingly, the state’s year-long surveillance of defendant’s internet activities was a search under Article I, section 9. The state did not secure a warrant, and, on this record, the state failed to establish that an exception to the warrant requirement applied. The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed in part. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A year of monitoring of internet use at a public portal where the company providing the portal cooperated with the police was state action. \u201c[T]he state’s year-long surveillance of defendant’s internet activities was a search under Article I, section 9.\u201d … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,73],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63718","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-computer-searches","category-search"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63718","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\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=63718"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63718\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":63724,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63718\/revisions\/63724"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=63718"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=63718"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=63718"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}