LE practice of pulling USPS pkgs for 'sniff test' is unlawful, OR Court of Appeals rules

Very interesting article about the process that LE uses to pull suspicious packages from the USPS mail stream for inspection and the standards for probable cause: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/05/portland_police_practice_of_pu.html#incart_m-rpt-1

Here's the link to the Court of Appeals case: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A153361.pdf

Excerpts:

A U.S. postal inspector and Portland police had no legal authority to intercept a package headed to a Southeast Portland home just because they had a hunch it contained contraband and a police dog later alerted to it, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday.


Barnthouse, then 26, was arrested and booked into the downtown Multnomah County jail in April 2012 after police pulled a package from the mail stream that had been headed for delivery to his home near Southeast 36th and Belmont Street.

Although the package might have seemed innocuous to the average person, it set off red flags for police officers regularly stationed at the postal cargo center. According to the appeals court's summary of the case:

•It was addressed to a pseudonym "Maxi-pad Barnt" -- similar to Barnthouse's name. Police said that senders and recipients associated with the drug world often hide their identities behind fictitious names.

•It was sent from a state where medical marijuana isn't legal -- Delaware -- to a state where medical marijuana is legal and the drug is more prevalent -- Oregon. Authorities say marijuana buyers often send money to Oregon and get marijuana in return.

•The address was handwritten, not typed.

•The sender's listed ZIP code was different from the ZIP code from where the package was sent.

•The postage was paid with cash or debit card, not from an established business account.

That was enough, police said, for them to remove Barnthouse's package from the mail stream about 6 a.m. and set it aside for the narcotics-detection police dog, Nikko, to sniff. The dog signaled that something of interest was inside the package.

Pulling packages for the sniff test is something police and a postal inspector do 30 to 40 times per day, according to the appeals court summary. The dog is correct about 90 percent of the time, an officer testified. Officers typically end up investigating seven to 14 of the pulled packages a day by using their computer databases to search the names and addresses on them to see if they're linked to known criminals, according to the summary.


Multnomah County Circuit Judge Christopher Marshall agreed, finding that the first misstep by police was physically removing the package from the mail stream when they had no reasonable suspicion or probable cause.

Prosecutors brought the case to the Court of Appeals -- arguing that police hadn't actually "seized" the package -- that Barnthouse had no "possessory interests" in the package -- because officers brought the package to his home hours before its guaranteed delivery time of noon.

The appeals court disagreed Wednesday by upholding the lower court's decision.

"We conclude that, for an in-transit USPS express mail package, the police may not detain such a package without probable cause and a warrant or without the existence of one of the carefully delineated exceptions to the warrant requirement," the appeals court wrote.

The case against Barnthouse is now essentially over. Prosecutors have no evidence to proceed.


Comments


[11 Points] alltheshrams:

I would HIGHLY suggest anyone interested in the topic should read the court opinion I linked above, and especially the first 12 pages, which lay out a lot of the procedures which US postal inspectors and LE go through in identifying suspicious packages.

Here's the relevant paragraph:

They look for packages bearing exterior indicators that they deem characteristic of illegal-drug or drug-money parcels. Such indicators include the “overtaping” of a package’s seams; handwritten, as opposed to printed, shipping information; delivery from an individual to an individual, rather than to or from a business entity; variation between the zip code from which a package was sent and the zip code listed for the return address; payment for delivery by cash or debit card, instead of billing to a business account; origination from a non-medical-marijuana state; waiver of any signature requirement at delivery; and use of possibly fictitious or incomplete identifying information for the sender or recipient. Helton testified that it is common for the public to send express mail packages using handwritten labels and for people, including himself, to use cash to pay their fee.


[9 Points] bigfondue:

Why order weed from Delaware of all places when you live in Oregon? My mind is blown.

Also Maxi-pad? Also consenting to a search? This guy is lucky as fuck that the court of appeals saved his ass.

Assuming this has no relevance outside of Oregon?


[7 Points] None:

It's truly shocking when once in a million the state actually protects citizens rights. But good news


[3 Points] FuckLEInTheAss:

Vendor here living in Oregon. This is fucking fantastic news. But this should also be an obvious warning sign that vendors REALLY need to vac seal their shit.


[3 Points] EJackBoy420:

do you have any idea how many packages the USPS process on a daily basis.

It's simply impossible. Unless you get a letter envelope and stuffed a 8th of weed in there, Unwrapped with no return address.

Even then , theres still a chance it gets delievered.

the packages they "pulled" fall in the less than 1% of US-US mailed freight

The system is solid, theres just no way they can check every piece of mail.

They are a transportation entity of the US gov. They aren't law enforcement


[3 Points] damnmachine:

I was under the impression that it is unlawful for USPS Priority packages to be randomly pulled for inspection and thus why most vendors ship Priority to begin with.


[2 Points] drimilr:

this is more of a case of a buyer blowing up the vendor's spot. the buyer did everything possibly wrong to get his package pulled.

however, the vendor shouldn't be doing CIM deals anyways.

bad move on both people's part.


[1 Points] scrubaccount:

Good news :)


[1 Points] xanaxman53:

Is there a news video on this?


[1 Points] unkz:

Maybe some day the contents of our internet traffic will get the same protections. In my mind, mail stream = packet stream.


[1 Points] dnmadvocate:

What i think is awesome, is as many lines and books of rules and laws they have, there are also many rulings and examples and also lines and rules the essentially making the practice completely legal rendering all evidence in court useless. This applies to everything. The american justice system is unique in that pretty much everything is illegal (innocent until proven guilty) and yet there is way out of everything, and without going into the things like dont self incriminate. I'll leave it at know your rights, demand and attorney, shut the fuck up or just imagine bubba fucking you in the butthole 10 times a day for 1-5-10-20years...... As much as everything is against you, if your smart, you can literally get away with murder.. and it happens much much much much more often than you think. oh the irony, the DNM remove this aspect of live..... WHEN THE FUCK ARE THE FEDERAL OFFICIALS GOING TO FUCKING REALIZE THIS SHIT!!!!!! GRRRRR!!!! too much coffffffee