above information, police obtained the search warrant. The Court of Appeals distinguished the two searches, reasoning that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the UPS box and that he did have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the garbage he placed in the opaque garbage bags. State v. Krech, 399 N.W.2d 203, 205 (Minn.App.1987). The court then reasoned that the totality of information that was lawfully obtained — the information Cross received at the bars, the observations he made when he was babysitting, and the information obtained from seizing the UPS box — established probable cause justifying the issuance of the search warrant. 399 N.W.2d at 206-07. Relevant garbage-search cases include: Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 80 S.Ct. 683, 4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Michaels, 726 F.2d 1307,
holding that the fourth amendment protects property as well as privacy holding that under article i section 9 a person has no constitutionally protected privacy interest in abandoned property recognizing that defendant had diminished expectationof privacy in motel room holding no 4th amendment violation where officers seized items abandoned in hotel wastepaper basket after checkout holding that when a person checked out of a motel leaving behind certain items in the waste basket of his room he had abandoned the property and thereby lost any fourth amendment right to privacy in the property