Home › Case briefs › Criminal Procedure

California v. Greenwood

Supreme Court of the United States · 1988 · Criminal Procedure

Criminal ProcedureFourth Amendmentgarbagethird party doctrinecurtilageFourth Amendmentreasonable expectation of privacytrash pulls

Facts

Police investigators received information suggesting Greenwood was involved in narcotics trafficking and observed late-night short-stay traffic at his home. On two occasions, officers arranged with the regular trash collector to pick up opaque garbage bags that Greenwood had left on the curb in front of his house, outside the curtilage, and to turn them over without mixing them with other trash. The officers searched the garbage and found items indicative of narcotics use, then used that information to obtain warrants to search the home. The searches of the house uncovered narcotics and evidence of narcotics trafficking.

Issue

Does the Fourth Amendment prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home, in an area accessible to the public? Also, does a state-law privacy protection for garbage determine the scope of Fourth Amendment protection?

Rule

A warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home does not violate the Fourth Amendment unless the person had a subjective expectation of privacy that society accepts as objectively reasonable. Garbage left at the curb in a publicly accessible area is not protected because it is exposed to the public and voluntarily conveyed to a third party, the trash collector.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Columbus, Ohio, detectives suspected Lena Ortiz of selling pills from her townhouse. On the morning of regular pickup, they asked the neighborhood's sanitation crew to hand over the tied garbage bags Lena had placed at the edge of the alley behind her property, a spot used by all residents for pickup and open to passersby. The officers searched the bags without a warrant and found prescription labels and drug residue.

If Lena moves to suppress the evidence from the trash search under the Fourth Amendment, how should the court rule?

Explanation. The majority held that the Fourth Amendment is not violated by the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage in an area accessible to the public. Even if Lena subjectively expected privacy, society would not recognize that expectation as objectively reasonable once she placed the trash out for collection where the public and the collector could access it. The use of opaque tied bags does not change that result.