JUSTICES DEBATE PRIVACY RIGHTS

WASHINGTON - The Avon lady, the pizza man and poker-playing buddies played
a role Tuesday as the Supreme Court debated the privacy rights of guests in
someone else's home.

The court must decide in a Minnesota drug case whether short-term visitors
have the same protection against unreasonable police searches as their hosts.

Prosecutor James C. Backstrom argued that most temporary guests have no
such protection - particularly not two men arrested after a police officer
peered through a gap in window blinds and saw them putting white powder
into plastic bags.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer noted that when people invite someone over, the
idea is often like the Spanish expression "mi casa es su casa - my house is
yours."

But, he added, "Why do we want to protect the privacy of the pizza man?"

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor suggested the Avon lady should not expect her
activities to be more private if invited indoors than if she made her sales
pitch on the front step.

And Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked, "Would it make any difference ... if
they had gathered to play a game of poker rather than put together coke?"

Backstrom said most short-term guests do not have an expectation of
privacy, but a frequent visitor might have a stronger argument.

"If they play (poker) five times a week they get standing, but if they play
once they don't?" asked Justice David H. Souter.

Minnesota's top court threw out the drug convictions of Wayne Thomas Carter
and Melvin Johns, saying they could challenge the officer's actions as an
unlawful search even though they were only visiting someone else's home.

Their lawyer, Bradford Colbert, argued Tuesday that any intrusion into a
home should require a search warrant.

Checked-by: Mike Gogulski