Pubdate: Thu, 17 May 2007 Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA) Copyright: 2007 Hearst Communications Inc. Contact: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/388 Author: Bob Egelko Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Cannabis - California) SEARCH FOR POT IN TEDDY BEAR WAS ILLEGAL, COURT AFFIRMS Police in Rohnert Park who ripped open a teddy bear inside a sealed package and found it stuffed with marijuana can't justify their no-warrant search on the grounds that the sender used a phony name, a state appeals court has ruled. The First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco agreed Tuesday with a Sonoma County judge who dismissed drug charges against Gilberto Pereira after ruling the search illegal. The court rejected a prosecution argument that Pereira had abandoned his right to keep the contents of his mail private by using a pseudonym on the return address when he shipped the bear. Pereira brought a sealed package to a shipping company in August 2005 for delivery to a Wisconsin address. The owner of the store told police he had grown suspicious of Pereira because he had been sending overnight packages every two weeks to different addresses in Wisconsin for the previous several months. The owner called authorities after he opened the package and found a teddy bear with crude stitching covering a cut in the fabric and a heavy object inside. Police cut the bear open and found about a half pound of marijuana, the court said. A later search of Pereira, his car and his apartment turned up additional drugs. Superior Court Judge Cerena Wong found that police had no justification for opening and searching the teddy bear without a warrant and ruled the evidence inadmissible, requiring dismissal of the charges. In upholding her ruling, the appeals court said using a false name on a package does not forfeit one's right to privacy. "There are many legitimate reasons to use a fictitious name," Justice Stuart Pollak said in the 3-0 ruling, citing another court decision that referred to authors and journalists who use pseudonyms, celebrities who want to avoid intrusion, and government officials who have security concerns. The fact that some criminals use aliases does not mean that "everyone who wishes to remain anonymous when sending mail loses their expectation of privacy," Pollak said. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman