CO's

[matchset]

i was stopped by a Conservation officer tonight... needless to say i was not written a citation.....

BUT....

do CO's really have the authority to drive off a public road, and down a narrow tractor trail between two corn fields nearly a quarter mile on PRIVATE land...just to check my archery license??

[wannafish2]

Good question.....I am curious to hear what others say about this. I wouldn't think they would be able to enter private property the way you described without cause.

[swampbuck]

They are doing their job and ca pretty much go where they want.... That being said I think they are a bit over zealous at times.

Don envy their job when we are out hunting/fishing they are working for the most part

[matchset]

doing there job yes....but was it trespassing what he did?

[GatorBait]

As far as i'm concerned, if i'm not doing anything wrong, a C/O showing up isn't going to be a problem, regardless of where I am. This is a very touchy and political subject as everyone views their 4th amendment rights differently, especially when it comes to house searches and private property.

Private Property = A premises. Hunting = Activity requiring a license. So....

Minnesota Statutes § 97A.215, subd. 3 (2000) provides:An enforcement officer may, at reasonable times:(1) enter and inspect the premises of an activity requiring a license under the game and fish laws;  and(2) stop and inspect a motor vehicle requiring a license under the game and fish laws.

[Wanderer]

Yes, a CO can travel across private property to check your license. If they couldn't, we could assume property owners could do just about anything they wanted to as long as they kept it on their side of the fence.

It might have been nice if he had walked though. Maybe he had a lot of early antlerless hunters to check today.

[matchset]

i'm just glad there was two of us bowhunting tonight.... it was a little freaky to see a dark figure standing beside my pickup that far off the road!

[birdswacker]

What if there was no tractor trail and he drove accross an alfalfa field or bean field?

[Big A]

It is legal. No what if's.

[eyeguy 54]

What if there was no tractor trail and he drove accross an alfalfa field or bean field?

I doubt a CO would do that just to check a liscence. Now if he saw somebody committing a crime thru his spotting scope then I would guess it would be up to him how to get there.

[just_jig]

He was standing by your pickup truck... Big deal, he didn't ruin your hunt!!!

[KG243]

If anyone doubts how a CO does his or her job, do a ride-a-long with them. I am in the process of becoming a peace officer and have very high hopes of wanting to be a CO. The ones I have met are great people and do a very demanding job.

[psepuncher]

WOW,

you mean he didn't jump out of the bushes at you?

[Rippinlip]

In the overall scheme of things, I do appreciate the job they are doing, I had one walk across a hay field (about 1/2 mile) to check our early season goose license, this CO actually parked by our vehicles kinda frustrated, due to the fact the only geese we had come close that day was when we were getting checked, kinda bad timing. Ironic I guess.

If you are not breaking the law, there's nothing to worry about.

I was told once that DNR agents have more authority and rights than city police, county sheriffs, or state patrols. Just what I was told, not sure if this person was correct or not.

[Stratosman]

Absolotely correct, they have no jursidiction issues inside state lines and don't need seacrh warrants or consent for illegal game posession searches in the vehicle or home.... Way more freedom.

[zamboni]

I am 99.9% certain they can go anywhere within state borders. Private property or not. They are law enforcement, and I have never seen a no trespassing sign stopping a cop before. If it did, meth labs would put a sign up and be able to get off in court.

On a side note, according to the fallen officers site, in the state of Minnesota, the DNR has lost 14 officers in the line of duty, whereas the troopers have lost 8. Dangerous job? Better believe it, almost everyone they come into contact with is armed.

[germanshorthairs]

Stratosman, I have to disagree. They can not just come to my door and walk in my house. They need a warrant like any peace officer. They are not exempt from the 4th amendment. But I would like some statute number that does allow this if you know of one. I am always willing to learn. If this was the case-we would have lots more CO's so ordinary cops would not have to get a warrant for other cases-they could simply go looking for illegally possessed game. just my two cents.

[GatorBait]

Well, Warrants do not need to be issued if the search is in connection of an arrest, falls under the Plain View Doctrine, you fall into the conversation trap and give consent or it's an emergency exception (Public Safety or loss of important evidence). Probably Cause will also bite one in the rear which would fit Stratos's example. You get caught for overbagging for fishing lets say, expect them to follow you right to your freezer. They have the cause and now your privacy has went right out the door. Irregardless to all that, C/O's fall under the same laws as everyone else. Because their jobs are more entailed and open to more areas, it may seem that they have more laxed policies to search but it's not the case.

[MinDak Hunter]

A CO has regulatory authority so they can enter onto private property to do the job. All law enforcement uses the open field doctrine and it has been upheld by the US Supreme Court. "The open field doctrine is a term used in criminal law to stand for the concept that anything plainly visible to the eye, even if it’s on private property, is subject to a search since it’s not hidden. Under this doctrine, consent to inspect the location is not required in order for a law enforcement officer to observe and report on things in plain view and include observations made. An open field is not an area protected under the Fourth Amendment, and there is no expectation of a right of privacy for an open field."

As far a warrants go in the field a CO does not need a one... in most cases. A hunter/angler is required to "submit to inspection" while out hunting or fishing.

97A.251 OBSTRUCTION OF OFFICERS.

Subdivision 1.Unlawful conduct.

A person may not:

(1) intentionally hinder, resist, or obstruct an enforcement officer, agent, or employee of the division in the performance of official duties;

(2) refuse to submit to inspection of equipment used to take wild animals while in the field, licenses, or wild animals; or

(3) refuse to allow inspection of a motor vehicle, boat, or other conveyance used while taking or transporting wild animals.

Subd.

2.Civil actions.

In addition to criminal prosecution, the state may bring a civil action to recover damages resulting from and enjoin the continuance of a violation of this section. The civil actions may be brought by the attorney general on the request of the commissioner.

[pulleye16]

I thought I heard they could no longer just enter into your fish house anymore...they need permission. I thought that was a big argument a few years back. I have no problems ever letting them enter, just thought they weren't allowed to do that anymore.

[GatorBait]

Again:

Minnesota Statutes § 97A.215, Subd. 3.Licensed activity. An enforcement officer may, at reasonable times:

(1) enter and inspect the premises of an activity requiring a license under the game and fish laws;

[Jack Stasney]

I know a lot of people were mad when CO's would just bust into a fish house unexpectedly years back, escpecially when there were women in the houses. It could get awkward fast. I think that approach has gone away as in recent years they seem to always knock.

[RJMOEN]

They arent allowed to enter a house or fish shack etc without permission or a warrant. I know it says they have permission to enter a premise but theres been at least one case where a person was making meth in a fish house, Co entered without a warrant and case was tossed out.

[Judge Smails]

Again:

Minnesota Statutes § 97A.215, Subd. 3.Licensed activity. An enforcement officer may, at reasonable times:

(1) enter and inspect the premises of an activity requiring a license under the game and fish laws;

Statutes don't tell the whole story.

This was discussed on the ice fishing forum a while back. A MN Supreme Court case from 2002 stated that a man's permanent or clam is his ice castle and protected by the 4th amendment.

From State v. Larsen (a CO didn't ask permission to enter an ice house and found Larsen smoking dope with three lines in the water).

The occupant of a fish house is entitled to the protections against unreasonable search and seizure afforded by our federal and state constitutions, and while we do not hold that Minn.Stat. § 97A.215, subd. 3 is unconstitutional, we do hold that these constitutional protections must be read into the “at reasonable times” language of subdivision 3. See Minn.Stat. § 645.17(3) (2000) (providing the presumption that the legislature does not intend to violate the constitution of the United States or Minnesota Constitution).   As conservation officers are subject to the same constitutional constraints as other law enforcement officers in the performance of their duties, the warrantless search of a fish house by a conservation officer is per se unreasonable in the absence of express consent or other circumstance justifying entry and therefore is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, § 10 of the Minnesota Constitution.

[harvey lee]

I believe a CO has more power in regards to search and siezure than any other peace officer.

I have been checked about everywhere and far into a field.

Once I was hunting in a field and the CO drove across the field in a foot of snow to check me.

No big deal he is just doing his job.

All this stuff with the CO is overstepping my boundries is hogwash. They need to have those freedoms to do thier job or who knows what might go on.

We wonder why the regulation book is so thick for the DNR with rules. The sportamen have broken so many laws in so many different ways that they have to or the guilty party would hire a lawyer and beat the ticket on a technicality.

They are guilty but somehow or someway we will beat it.

Those are the same people who squak about less wildlife being around to hunt.

There are so few CO's for the area they cover that the majority are never checked. I guess that is why we now have the TIP program.

Maybe we could get more cases to the Supreme court so the CO could do nothing.

They are out there making sure we do not break the laws. If we were all perfect, then no need for a CO.

I have never recieved a fine for breaking a law but I have recieved a few for other things like the wrong colored hat on for deer hunting, it was not orange. He could have wrote me a ticket but let me go. They are not the jerk-baits so many want to make them out to be.

All of the my rights were violated is out of control, seems many want the laws written just for them. When I was younger I really wanted to pursue a carrer in the DNR as a CO. Boy with all the [PoorWordUsage] they recieve for doing thier job I am glad I did not.

Just my