Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops

Posted by: CJIS

Could someone Direct me to a specific currant law on this? (if there is one)

I can find plenty in the MGL about disposal but nothing about taking of trash.

I was talking with someone this morning and somehow we got on the topic of trash picking and it got me thinking what if any specific law pertains to this.

The only thing I could think of at first was trespass (to gain access to the trash junk etc.)

Then I thought of theft because once it goes in a dumpster I think it becomes prop. of the dumpster company.


You know what they say some people's junk is another persons treasure.

---

Posted by: 4ransom

California vs Greenwood
No. 86-684 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
486 U.S. 35
January 11, 1988
May 16, 1988
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Syllabus
Acting on information indicating that respondent Greenwood might be engaged in narcotics trafficking, police twice obtained from his regular trash collector garbage bags left on the curb in front of his house. On the basis of items in the bags which were indicative of narcotics use, the police obtained warrants to search the house, discovered controlled substances during the searches, and arrested respondents on felony narcotics charges. Finding that probable cause to search the house would not have existed without the evidence obtained from the trash searches, the State Superior Court dismissed the charges under People v. Krivda, 5 Cal.3d 357, 486 P.2d 1262, which held that warrantless trash searches violate the Fourth Amendment and the California Constitution. Although noting a post-Krivda state constitutional amendment eliminating the exclusionary rule for evidence seized in violation of state, but not federal, law, the State Court of Appeal affirmed on the ground that Krivda was based on federal, as well as state, law.
Held:
1. The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home. Pp. 39-44 .
(a) Since respondents voluntarily left their trash for collection in an area particularly suited for public inspection, their claimed expectation of privacy in the inculpatory items they discarded was not objectively reasonable. It is common knowledge that plastic garbage bags left along a public street are readily accessible to animals, children, scavengers, snoops, and other members of the public. Moreover, respondents placed their refuse at the curb for the express purpose of conveying it to a third party, the trash collector, who might himself have sorted through it or permitted others, such as the police, to do so. The police cannot reasonably be expected to avert their eyes from evidence of criminal activity that could have been observed by any member of the public. Pp. 43-44 .
(b) Greenwood's alternative argument that his expectation of privacy in his garbage should be deemed reasonable as a matter of federal constitutional law because the warrantless search and seizure of his garbage was impermissible as a matter of California law under Krivda, [p*36] which he contends survived the state constitutional amendment, 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. Pp. 43-44 .
2. Also without merit is Greenwood's contention that the California constitutional amendment violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Just as this Court's Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule decisions have not required suppression where the benefits of deterring minor police misconduct were overbalanced by the societal costs of exclusion, California was not foreclosed by the Due Process Clause from concluding that the benefits of excluding relevant evidence of criminal activity do not outweigh the costs when the police conduct at issue does not violate federal law. Pp. 44-45 .
182 Cal.App.3d 729, 227 Cal.Rptr. 539, reversed and remanded.
WHITE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which REHNQUIST, C.J., and BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, and SCALIA, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL, J., joined, post, p. 45 . KENNEDY, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. [p*37]
Opinions
WHITE, J., Opinion of the Court
JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

---

Posted by: CJIS

OK that explains trash on the side of the road what about a dumpster?

---

Posted by: Wolfman

(a) Is the dumpster locked?
(b) Is the dumpster located in an area that can be accessed only by duly authorized personnel or posted as no trespassing?

---

Posted by: 94c

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4ransom California vs Greenwood No. 86-684SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Unfortunately this case does not apply in Massachusetts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by npd_323 OK that explains trash on the side of the road what about a dumpster?

Once in the dumpster it becomes the property of the dumpster company.
If they wanted to press charges which I would doubt, you would have a larceny.

Just like if someone was to use the dumpster without authorization (for their trash) they could be charged with larceny of the services.

---

Posted by: tuffone

With many communities involved in recycling, some have bylaws/ordinances prohibiting the removal of items placed in a recyclcing bin.

In other words, once you put an article in a recycling bin and put it out for collection, it becomes the property of the municipality. The worth of the recycling material helps to fund the trash pickup.

Many people put deposit bottles in their recycling bins. So if someone is going through them for these bottles, he is breaking the law.

---

Posted by: CJIS

Quote:

Originally Posted by 94c Unfortunately this case does not apply in Massachusetts. Once in the dumpster it becomes the property of the dumpster company. If they wanted to press charges which I would doubt, you would have a larceny.

Thats what I thought.

---

Posted by: Delta784

1) Push dumpster-picker into dumpster.

2) Close lid.

3) Vigorously smash side of dumpster with baton.

4) Repeat as necessary.

---

Posted by: wgciv

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784 1) Push dumpster-picker into dumpster. 2) Close lid. 3) Vigorously smash side of dumpster with baton. 4) Repeat as necessary.

Hahahahaha

---

Posted by: PatrickMagnan

In Mass if it's at the curb then it can be removed by anyone. Unless other wise posted threw bylaws. I have used iteams from trash for couple cases I worked with.

---

Posted by: Wolfman

Someone ought to throw away a pocket spelling & grammar guide.

---

Posted by: CJIS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfman Someone ought to throw away a pocket spelling & grammar guide.

---

Posted by: 94c

Quote:

Originally Posted by npd_323

he...he...he...ditto is spelled wrong....

---

Posted by: NFAfan

Things must be reeeeeeal slow huh?

Many companies with dumpsters pay by weight to have them emptied. Anything that comes out of them reduces their cost in the long run.

As long as people aren't making unauthorized deposits most see no problem.

One company ( a huge local computer company) for example, used to scrap millions of dollars worth of new in the wrapper items to the company that had the bid for their scrap metals. That was just the stuff picked up at their plant....I can't imagine what was in their dumpsters. Wasteful is an understatement in their case.

I bought and paid for a brand new truck in one year from discarded industrial electronic items and scrap metal fifteen years ago. You can't imagine the money pissed away by some companies as trash. Its a write off for them and the consumer pays for it.

---

Posted by: massirishcop

Pretty much no expectation of privacy once the trash is curbside. I believe there is case law on this, that it is not illegal to remove items from someones trash.

---

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008 - Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser