holding that the defendant did not abandon a briefcase he tossed from the window of his house into his fenced backyard as police approached his home because, by “throwing [the briefcase] into the fenced-in curtilage of his family’s home, an area enjoying full Fourth Amendment protection,” the defendant retained a reasonable expectation of privacy in the briefcase
How later courts described this case
- holding that the defendant did not abandon a briefcase he tossed from the window of his house into his fenced backyard as police approached his home because, by “throwing [the briefcase] into the fenced-in curtilage of his family’s home, an area enjoying full Fourth Amendment protection,” the defendant retained a reasonable expectation of privacy in the briefcase
- holding that warrant was required where police opened locked briefcase which defendant had thrown from second story window of his home at time of arrest
- noting the “high degree of protection afforded by the Fourth Amendment to the curtilage of one’s own home”
- no abandonment where property is placed in a locked container and thrown into the family home’s fenced-in curtilage
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Lynch, J.
(dissenting). I agree with the reasoning of the Appeals Court. “Here, an inference of an intent to abandon the briefcase is reasonably supported by the circumstances of this case. It is not reasonable that a person has an expectation of privacy in a briefcase he pitches out the window as the police came in the front door.” Commonwealth v. Straw, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 738, 742 (1995).
I respectfully dissent.