Here’s a random one for the collective: tents as legal domicile?

[John10-19]

You have a reasonable expectation of privacy (REP) in a tent, even on public land. It is like a house while you're using it and you have the same 4th amendment protections against warrantless searches as in a residence. However, the area around a tent (it's curtilage) on public land does not have the same protections as your fenced residential yard. See:
https://www.llrmi.com/articles/legal...11_9th_basher/

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1153615.html

If it is not obvious the tent is still being used and it appears it was abandoned on public lands then the abandoned property exception may apply. A good reference for 4th ammendment questions may be found here:
https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/..._MSD_Final.pdf

You could certainly have REP and simultaneously be in a place where you aren't legally allowed to posses firearms. Note, that I am not an attorney and I'm not giving you legal advice. This post is a lay person referring you to potentially relevant case law with respect to REP.

[Radar Love]

Short answer: depends on your state laws.

Long answernot a lawyer/this is not legal advice etc.:

my understanding is that hotel rooms are legally your temporary domicile

Apologies if I come off especially nitpicky...law school has done that to me...but I think the phrase "temporary domicile" is a source of confusion here. Domicile is your permanent legal residence Temporary domicile is harder to define because, while the concept exists in all states, it's not always called the same thing.

For example, Utah has a statutory definition of Temporary Domicile as: the principal place of abode within Utah of a person who does not have a present intention to continue residency within Utah permanently or indefinitely." Maine, on the other hand, does not define Temporary Domicile. Not only that, Maine does have a single statute that even contains the phrase. Instead, Maine law establishes minimum requirement for domicile and Maine tax regulations interpret those as "Statutory Residency" (you must spend 183+ days in state and "maintain a permanent place of abode"). Note the similar language between Utah and Maine. And to make things even more confusing courts sometimes have to differentiate between "place of passing respite" and “abode” which requires an overnight stay. My understanding is that hotels, like any business can (where legal under state law) prohibit guests from carrying firearms if they want to. At least one Marriott does this. A bit of a tangent, but you likely have less right to privacy in a hotel room than in a tent. Anyway, point being that every state is going to be obnoxiously different and because they might not even use the same term to define "place I am spending the night" figuring out what the law actually is can be ridiculous.

This clusterfuck of confusion is probably why, as OlongJohnson pointed out, some states specifically passed laws about firearms in campsites.

Anyway, I have research database access and am actively procrastinating from writing a paper so hit me up with a state and I'll did up some case law if anyone is curious.

[whomever]

"On occasion, I've found travel that takes me through this or that corner of OR of late..."

Probably old news, but permit-less open carry is legal in OR. That's what I do when I backpack there. Open carry inside a tent is still open carry, I think. When I take my pants off at night I arrange them so the gun is still visible.

At least in eastern OR it doesn't raise any eyebrows at all. YMMV on the west side.

It's a minor PITA only when it rains during a hike, when I have to be careful to be sure the gun is getting properly rained on :-)

[Totem Polar]

Short answer: depends on your state laws.

Long answernot a lawyer/this is not legal advice etc.:


Anyway, I have research database access and am actively procrastinating from writing a paper so hit me up with a state and I'll did up some case law if anyone is curious.

That is some great information, (legal)zoomies, thanks for making it available to all. As an aside, that’s the second time in 10 minutes (in my life) that I’ve read about the 183 days definition for residency and taxes—the first being over in the Amazon thread.

I would be curious as to any case law in WA or OR, if any, but don’t kill your day over it.

The hotel issue is a thorny one, as a search of the hotel’s website doesn’t always reveal an answer. Good post.

[TC215]

Short answer: depends on your state laws.

Long answernot a lawyer/this is not legal advice etc.:



Apologies if I come off especially nitpicky...law school has done that to me...but I think the phrase "temporary domicile" is a source of confusion here. Domicile is your permanent legal residence Temporary domicile is harder to define because, while the concept exists in all states, it's not always called the same thing.

For example, Utah has a statutory definition of Temporary Domicile as: the principal place of abode within Utah of a person who does not have a present intention to continue residency within Utah permanently or indefinitely." Maine, on the other hand, does not define Temporary Domicile. Not only that, Maine does have a single statute that even contains the phrase. Instead, Maine law establishes minimum requirement for domicile and Maine tax regulations interpret those as "Statutory Residency" (you must spend 183+ days in state and "maintain a permanent place of abode"). Note the similar language between Utah and Maine. And to make things even more confusing courts sometimes have to differentiate between "place of passing respite" and “abode” which requires an overnight stay. My understanding is that hotels, like any business can (where legal under state law) prohibit guests from carrying firearms if they want to. At least one Marriott does this. A bit of a tangent, but you likely have less right to privacy in a hotel room than in a tent. Anyway, point being that every state is going to be obnoxiously different and because they might not even use the same term to define "place I am spending the night" figuring out what the law actually is can be ridiculous.

This clusterfuck of confusion is probably why, as OlongJohnson pointed out, some states specifically passed laws about firearms in campsites.

Anyway, I have research database access and am actively procrastinating from writing a paper so hit me up with a state and I'll did up some case law if anyone is curious.

How so?

[jetfire]

How so?

As a former hotel manager, the hotel staff is allowed to enter your room without your consent in a number of circumstances regardless of whether or not you have a Do Not Disturb on the door.

[Totem Polar]

How so?

Just for clarity, I assume you are asking about:

but you likely have less right to privacy in a hotel room than in a tent.

Correct?

This also raises a tangential question for LEOs working in many big cities: tent cities. Do LEOs have to treat/hold tents in a tent city under a freeway overpass to the same standard of care as a house in the suburbs? Just curious.

[TC215]

As a former hotel manager, the hotel staff is allowed to enter your room without your consent in a number of circumstances regardless of whether or not you have a Do Not Disturb on the door.

I may have assumed wrong, but I thought he was referencing right to privacy vs. the government.

Just for clarity, I assume you are asking about:

but you likely have less right to privacy in a hotel room than in a tent.

Correct?

This also raises a tangential question for LEOs working in many big cities: tent cities. Do LEOs have to treat/hold tents in a tent city under a freeway overpass to the same standard of care as a house in the suburbs? Just curious.

Yes, correct.

[jetfire]

I may have assumed wrong, but I thought he was referencing right to privacy vs. the government.



Yes, correct.

The law may have changed since I worked in hotels, but the other thing is that a hotel manager/employee can offer consent to LE for them to search a room you occupy. It's been 10 years but as I remember it I can consent to a search, let the cops in, and they can search anything that belongs to the hotel, or is in plain sight. So for example if you have a bag of coke on your nightstand you're fucked. But they can't go into locked suitcases or anything like that, so if your coke in a padlocked suitcase they can't open without your consent or a warrant.

But again it's been 10 years so that might have changed.

[TC215]

The law may have changed since I worked in hotels, but the other thing is that a hotel manager/employee can offer consent to LE for them to search a room you occupy. It's been 10 years but as I remember it I can consent to a search, let the cops in, and they can search anything that belongs to the hotel, or is in plain sight. So for example if you have a bag of coke on your nightstand you're fucked. But they can't go into locked suitcases or anything like that, so if your coke in a padlocked suitcase they can't open without your consent or a warrant.

But again it's been 10 years so that might have changed.

That’s definitely not the case.

United States v Jeffers- Hotel staff can enter the room to clean and make repairs, but cannot invite the police in the room/give consent. 1951 DC Court of Appeals Decision.

Stoner v California- Hotel clerk has no authority to grant consent. A hotel guest is entitled to the constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizures. The hotel had no authority to permit the room search. 1964 US Supreme Court decision.

If a hotel employee finds something while in/cleaning a room, LE would have to get a search warrant to search further.