Morgan Cannon
OA2
2/4/2014
Dr. Buckhoff
Acct 4631

OA2 1. What was the main reason for the appeal in this case by Kramer?
The jury convicted Kramer on both drug counts that he was indicted for. These charges were “conspired with unidentified persons to distribute large quantities of marijuana and amphetamines during the years 1977 and 1978, that on one occasion in 1977 defendant had distributed some 1,000 pounds of marijuana” (Westlaw, Kramer vs. US, pg. 1). The evidence used to support this case was retrieved from trash bags by policemen on Kramer’s property. These trash bags were to be garbage set there for a private garbage removal service to pick up. The policemen did not have a warrant to take this garbage, but they did so anyway, took it back to the station, and searched through it piece by piece. Kramer appealed this, saying that his garbage on his property is protected by the Fourth Amendment. He thought his garbage was private property that could be searched through or looked at by anyone but himself. Kramer was very mistaken by this. The Fourth Amendment does not protect possessory interests in land. A trespass invades someone’s right of possession. It does not have anything to do with privacy. Preventing others from using one’s land in the circumstances here is not a privacy interest. Kramer’s appeal was denied under these circumstances. 2. What was the final ruling by the court in regards to the admissibility of the evidence?
As I stated above, Kramer’s appeal to dismiss the evidence found in his garbage was denied. The court could not support his claim under the Fourth Amendment. Though his garbage is not public property it is sitting in his front yard for the public to see. If Kramer did not want anyone going through his garbage because of drug related documents, Kramer should have destroyed those documents. His careless actions about