Guests Right to Privacy v Fourth Amendment Infers

  • Slides: 11
Download presentation
Guest’s Right to Privacy v Fourth Amendment - Infers a Person’s Right to Privacy:

Guest’s Right to Privacy v Fourth Amendment - Infers a Person’s Right to Privacy: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects[. ]”

Guest’s Right to Privacy v 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 situations where innkeeper

Guest’s Right to Privacy v 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 situations where innkeeper is authorized to enter the guest room: Normal maintenance and repair; Imminent danger; Nonpayment; When requested to enter by guest; and When rental period has expired.

Guest’s Right to Privacy v v Duty by innkeeper to prevent entry by unauthorized

Guest’s Right to Privacy v v Duty by innkeeper to prevent entry by unauthorized employees and unauthorized would-be visitors (including spouses) – Campbell Peeping Toms - Carter

Protection against illegal searches v Fourth Amendment also protects against illegal searches and seizures

Protection against illegal searches v Fourth Amendment also protects against illegal searches and seizures – “The right of the people…against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. ”

Protection against illegal searches v If employee finds illegal activity upon legal entry of

Protection against illegal searches v If employee finds illegal activity upon legal entry of room, is obligated to report to police. v Employee must be in room legally

Protection against illegal searches General Rule: Police may only enter a guest’s room with

Protection against illegal searches General Rule: Police may only enter a guest’s room with a search warrant, which is an order from a judge commanding a police officer to search a designated place for evidence of criminal activity. v Must have probable cause, facts sufficient for a reasonably prudent person to believe that evidence of a crime is located in the place the police want to search. v Exclusionary Rule – “Fruit from the poisonous tree” v

Exceptions to Search Warrant Consent v Termination of occupancy- applies as soon as checkout

Exceptions to Search Warrant Consent v Termination of occupancy- applies as soon as checkout time occurs – People v. Ouellette v Disturbing the Peace – People v. Henning v Emergency Situation v Room registered to another v Search of items mislaid by guests – Berger v. State v

Protection against insults v Intentional infliction of emotional distress – offending conduct must be

Protection against insults v Intentional infliction of emotional distress – offending conduct must be “so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. ”

Protection against… v False Arrest : Hotel is under no duty to prevent the

Protection against… v False Arrest : Hotel is under no duty to prevent the arrest of a guest by police. Bertuca v Credit Card Theft

Rights Concerning Rates and Fees v Right to Advanced Notice v Right to No

Rights Concerning Rates and Fees v Right to Advanced Notice v Right to No extraneous Fees- State of NY v. Waldorf-Astoria v Telephone Charges

Proper Handling of Mail, Packages, and Facsimile v 1. 2. 3. v Example of

Proper Handling of Mail, Packages, and Facsimile v 1. 2. 3. v Example of Proper Procedure: When package is received for guest, give guest notice; “call” light is illuminated in room; Package not released unless person claiming it exhibits ID. Berlow v. Sheraton