State v. Pool, 529 P.3d 712

Camille Pool pleaded guilty to misdemeanor DUI and was sentenced via Zoom on May 26, 2020; the magistrate required waiver of her Fourth Amendment right to warrantless searches as a condition of supervised probation.
A written Judgment of Conviction form checked a box stating the defendant "specifically waives" Fourth Amendment searches of person, vehicle, or residence; Pool did not sign the Judgment in court (it was mailed to her).
Pool signed a Standard Conditions of Probation agreement the next day, which referenced compliance with the Judgment; her probation officer testified he reviewed the Fourth Amendment waiver with her at intake.
After probation violations, officers conducted a residence check on April 14, 2021; Pool acknowledged understanding the search-waiver, officers searched her home, and seized drugs and paraphernalia.
Pool moved to suppress, arguing she had not waived her rights under Article I, §17 of the Idaho Constitution (distinct from the Fourth Amendment); the district court granted suppression, finding no Article I, §17 waiver.
The State appealed; the Idaho Supreme Court reviewed whether Pool’s Fourth Amendment waiver also constituted consent under Article I, §17 where the protections are coextensive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Pool’s waiver of Fourth Amendment rights as a probation condition also waived Article I, §17 rights when those protections are coextensive	The State: Pool’s valid waiver of the Fourth Amendment constitutes consent to the warrantless search, and where Article I, §17 offers no greater protection, the waiver covers both	Pool: A waiver mentioning only the Fourth Amendment cannot be read to waive separate Idaho constitutional rights under Article I, §17	The Supreme Court reversed: where Fourth Amendment and Article I, §17 protections are coextensive, a valid waiver of Fourth Amendment rights constitutes consent covering both; Pool’s suppression order was reversed

State v. Hansen, 167 Idaho 831, 477 P.3d 885 (discussing warrantless-search presumptions and probationer consent exception)
State v. Jaskowski, 163 Idaho 257, 409 P.3d 837 (scope of probation waiver is determined by the waiver’s language)
State v. Maxim, 165 Idaho 901, 454 P.3d 543 (probation condition consent discussed in context of searches)
State v. Turek, 150 Idaho 745, 250 P.3d 796 (probation term limiting searches "at the request of" required officers to notify before searching)
State v. Koivu, 152 Idaho 511, 272 P.3d 483 (Idaho Constitution can provide greater protection than the Fourth Amendment)
State v. Webb, 130 Idaho 462, 943 P.2d 52 (Article I, §17 may afford broader curtilage protection than the Fourth Amendment)
J.R. Simplot Co. v. Bosen, 144 Idaho 611, 167 P.3d 748 (contract interpretation principles applied to probation waiver language)