State v. De Witt Simons

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court held that accessing the internet through a public Wi-Fi network does not eliminate a person’s privacy right under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. The court further held that terms-of-service provisions did not eliminate that right and that the coordinated monitoring by the Wi-Fi provider and law enforcement constituted state action and a search. Because the state conducted year-long warrantless surveillance without establishing a warrant exception, the court reversed the Court of Appeals in part, reversed the circuit court’s judgment, and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The mere fact that a person accesses the internet through a public or third-party Wi-Fi network does not eliminate the person's Article I, section 9, right to privacy in internet browsing activities.
2. Terms-of-service provisions stating that a Wi-Fi provider may monitor activity or cooperate with law enforcement do not, by themselves, eliminate the user's Article I, section 9, privacy right in internet browsing activity.
3. A&W's owner and consultant acted as state agents when, following law enforcement's directions, they monitored defendant's internet activity and supplied information to the investigating officer.
4. The coordinated, year-long surveillance of defendant's internet activities was a search under Article I, section 9.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution protects a person's privacy in internet browsing activities when the person accesses the internet through a public Wi-Fi network operated by a third party.
2. Whether terms-of-service provisions notifying a user that the provider may monitor network activity and cooperate with law enforcement eliminate the user's Article I, section 9, privacy right.
3. Whether the coordinated, year-long monitoring conducted by A&W at law enforcement's direction constituted state action.
4. Whether the warrantless monitoring constituted a search under Article I, section 9, and whether an exception to the warrant requirement justified it.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded