1993-10-20 - PRIVACY: Shredded trash doesn’t cut it

Header Data

From: System Operator <anagld!decode!system@uunet.UU.NET>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: a9d64ddf49226a3141be1363f2cefe325ce7b87a90582c193c679dde9ff68ef6
Message ID: <6N1PBc2w165w@decode.UUCP>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-10-20 16:22:34 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 20 Oct 93 09:22:34 PDT

Raw message

From: System Operator <anagld!decode!system@uunet.UU.NET>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 93 09:22:34 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: PRIVACY: Shredded trash doesn't cut it
Message-ID: <6N1PBc2w165w@decode.UUCP>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Fellow Cypherpunks,

As if there was any doubt, the following will show that even
shredded trash is not safe:

From _Search and Seizure Bulletin_, Vol 30, No. 9, September 1993

Shredded Documents - No Privacy Interest in Public Trash
United States v. Scott, 975 F.2d 927 (1992)

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) suspected Scott of filing false
income tax returns.  IRS agent's searched Scott's garbage bags which
were left in front of his house for collection and found shredded

The agents pieced the papers together and were able to establish
probable cause to request search warrants based on the evidence
revealed in the whole documents.  The IRS presented a 47-count
indictment against Scott.

Scott moved to suppress the evidence, claiming the search of his
garbage violated his privacy interests.  His motion was granted and
the United States appealed.

DECISION: Reversed and sent back to the lower court.

The Constitution does not prohibit the warrantless seizure of shredded
documents found in public trash.

Scott relinquished his reasonable expectation of privacy in the garbage
once he abandoned it outside his house to be collected or destroyed by
a third party.  That he may have desired secrecy by shredding the documents
does not change the fact he left the garbage in the public domain,
and the police were free to use their resources to collect the evidence.

A legitimate expectation of privacy is measured not by the individual's
desire to maintain secrecy, but by whether the government's action
violates constitutionally recognized privacy rights.  Because Scott
had no constitutionally protected privacy interest in this trash, the
appeals court decided his motion to suppress should have been denied.

California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35, 108 S.Ct. 1625, 100 L.Ed.2d 30 (1988)
United States v. Mustone, 469 F.2d 970 (1972)


system@decode.UUCP (System Operator)
Cryptography, Security, Privacy BBS  +1 410 730 6734   Data/FAX