A man who tried taking meth into an Evanston court two years ago doesnât get another chance to defend himself against his resulting drug-possession conviction, the Wyoming Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. Â
Joseph W. Russell, 64, is serving a probation term after a Uinta County Sheriffâs Office deputy caught him trying to take meth into the local courthouse, court documents and prison records show.
Russell came to the Evanston Circuit Court on Nov. 14, 2022, for a civil hearing, and Uinta County Sheriffâs Deputy Dan Jensen was working court security that day.
Russell walked through the metal detector and it rang out, indicating metal in Russellâs pants pocket area, says a Wyoming Supreme Court ruling issued Tuesday.
Jensen patted down Russellâs body and found a Snus tobacco can.
Here, the deputy had testified that Russell took the can out of his own pocket, while Russellâs account was that the deputy fished the can out of Russellâs pocket.
The deputy either asked Russell to open the can or commanded him to open it, depending on whose account is referenced.
Once it was opened, the deputy observed that Russell was âtrying to hide something from me,â which turned out to be a small plastic bag containing a crystalline substance, says the high courtâs order.
Jensen believed it to be meth, seized the can and arrested Russell, who was ultimately charged with meth possession, a felony.
Jensen testified during the prosecution that followed that he was worried about something dangerous being in the Snus can. But the deputy conceded that he didnât believe the can contained a razor blade or an explosive, and that he did want to see what was inside it.
Before Russell alerted the magnetometer, the deputy had told him he could lock his things in one of the court lockers, the document says.
Ultimately, the Uinta County District Court sentenced Russell to two years of supervised probation, with the threat of between one and three years in prison if he violates that probation.
Fourth Amendment Right Hits A Limit
Americans have a right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. In general (but with many exceptions), law enforcement agents have to get a warrant before searching someone.
Russell told the high court that Jensen shouldnât have searched inside the Snus can because he didnât have an individualized suspicion that Russell was doing wrong â and he didnât have a warrant.
The state of Wyoming, which defended its prosecutorâs position on appeal, countered that Jensenâs search was constitutionally reasonable.
Courts have specifically addressed security screenings and taken notice of their necessity to keep courthouses safe, says the ruling.
And in such a âspecial needs search,â courts try to decide if the search was reasonable by weighing the publicâs interests versus those of the individual.
The U.S. Supreme Court test for weighing that reasonableness is to consider three factors: The nature and immediacy of the governmentâs concern tied to the search; the nature of the personâs privacy interest, which is being intruded upon; and the character of the intrusion.
The government has a âcompelling interestâ to keep its courtrooms safe, the Wyoming Supreme Courtâs ruling says, speaking to the first factor in the test.
On the other hand, a personâs privacy interest when walking into court is âminimal,â the ruling continues.
âA person does not have a âreasonable expectation of absolute privacyâ in a âpublic facility where all members of the public (are) subject to a routine search,ââ says the ruling, quoting from an earlier case.
In other words, if everyoneâs being searched and everyone expects to be searched, then thereâs nothing unreasonable about the search done on one man in particular.
Russell countered, saying that just because he had a metal Snus can on him shouldnât have meant that the can should automatically have been singled out for a further search.
âWe disagree,â wrote the high court, adding that when Russell walked into the courthouse, he and his Snus can both relinquished their expectations of privacy.
Russell cited a case in which an officer searched a wallet that a man he was purportedly helping had dropped. The officer found drugs, and the court sided with the man rather than the officer.
That case is not the same as Russellâs, said the Wyoming Supreme Court, because the man with the wallet wasnât consenting to a search by walking into a known search zone.
Invasive
By Russellâs argument, the search became invasive when Jensen ordered him to open the Snus can.
Again, the high court disagreed, and said that the can could have contained something too dangerous for court after all.
âDeputy Jensenâs subjective intent is irrelevant,â the court added.
Russell also argued that Jensen should have just told Russell to put the Snus can somewhere outside the courthouse or throw it away.
That would have accomplished the governmentâs goal of protecting the courthouse, but it wasnât constitutionally required, the high court countered.
Russell is due to complete his probation by December 2025.
Clair McFarland can be reached at clair@cowboystatedaily.com.