Singing Loudly

Via Talk Left, I find that a District Court in Utah is set to determine whether a homeowner has a Fourth Amendment privacy right in their doorknob.

I say no.

What is happening is police are using new technology, the Ionscan test, to take a swap of doorknobs. If that cloth sample ends up testing positive for drug particles than they will tell a magistrate that they have probable cause to institute a search.

The defense argues that the doorknob is a protected part of the home. I don't think so. I don't think it's very different from the outside of a mailbox or driveway or tree in your front yard. It is an area that is open to anyone to approach including friends, strangers, door-to-door salespersons, the UPS employee, and yourself.

The defense attorney says, "A person has a subjective expectation of privacy in their front door, which is part of the home itself."

Privacy at the front door? Then why do people put little wreaths, banners, and signs on their front door for all to read? Does the accident federal defender, Wendy Lewis, truly believe that people have a right to privacy to their front door?

Now let us be clear. This is the front of your front door. This isn't the police opening your door and taking a swab sample from the inside of your house. That is a crucial difference which the defense attorneys seem to ignore. You can tell they don't grasp the difference as they argue in their brief the "2001 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that required Oregon police to get a warrant before using thermal imaging technology, which senses the use of heat lamps."

Scalia wrote that opinion and was quick to point out that they were seeing what sort of activity could be occurring INSIDE the home. This is activity that is occurring outside the home.

Now, what seems to be a more strong argument is that this is the outside of the house. This is where everyone can come and approach. From the neighbor kid who rings the doorbell and rattles the doorknob to the Fed Ex deliverer who might have just snorted cocaine in his truck. What does the swab of the door really tell a magistrate. I don't think there is an ounce of evidence in this alone.

A swab of substance from the front of your house. An area open to the general public is not indicative of what occurs in your house. There is not sufficient probable cause, even where test results reveal strong traces of drugs on the doorknob, to warrant a search of the inside of a persons home. The probable cause is so weak it almost seems like a joke. I'm sure there are quite a few homeowners who touch their front doorknob less frequently than strangers do.

While this is certainly a dumb practice by the police it doesn't seem to violate any 4th Amendment privacy interests. The only thing it violates is the need for probable cause if the results are actually used by police to garner a search warrant for the inside of the connected home.