California v. Greenwood IV

Greenwood's second argument was that the warrantless search and seizure of his garbage violated the California law under Krivda. His alternative argument that his expectation of privacy in his garbage should be deemed reasonable as a matter of Federal Constitutional law is without merit. "The reasonableness of a search for Fourth Amendment purposes does not depend upon privacy concepts embodied in the law of the particular State in which the search occurred; rather, it turns upon the understanding of society as a whole that certain areas deserve the most scrupulous protection from government invasion. There is no such understanding with respect to garbage left for collection at the side of a public street." - http://www.fightidentitytheft.com/shred_supreme_court.html So, Greenwood's alternative argument was rejected. "Quoting Katz v. United States, the court concluded that "what a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection." - http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/California_v._Greenwood

"The court of Appeal affirmed. 182 Cal. App. 3d 729, 227 Cal. Rptr. 539 (1986). The court noted at the outset that the fruits of warrantless trash searches could no longer be suppressed if Krivda were based only on the California Constitution, because since 1982 the State has barred the suppression of evidence seized in violation of California law but not federal law."  - http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=486&invol=35