When most people think about “search and seizure” law, they think of police searching a car or home. But a Mississippi Court of Appeals decision from 2022 shows that your rights under the Mississippi constitution extend farther than many realize, even to land and property beyond your house.
In Walter P. Okhuysen v. City of Starkville, the Court ruled that the Mississippi Constitution gives property owners broader protection against government searches than the U.S. Constitution does. The case involved a code enforcement officer who entered a man’s private property without permission or a warrant. The city later used photos from that visit to declare the property a “public menace.” The court threw that out, and in doing so it drew a firm line around private property rights in Mississippi.
What Happened
A Starkville code enforcement officer went onto a homeowner’s land without consent, took pictures of what he thought were code violations, and used those photos to build a case against the owner. The city later held a hearing and decided the property was a public health menace, allowing it to order cleanup and assess costs against the owner.
But the problem was this: the officer never had permission or a warrant to go onto the property in the first place. And there certainly weren't what we call "exigent circumstances." The Mississippi Court of Appeals found that this made the entire case unconstitutional.
The Mississippi Constitution Offers Broader Protection Than Federal Law
Under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, police generally need a warrant to search your “persons, houses, papers, and effects.” Federal courts have said this protection usually stops at your home and its immediate surroundings (the “curtilage”), not extending to “open fields.”
But the Mississippi Constitution goes further than the U.S. Constitution. Article 3, Section 23 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890 protects people against unreasonable searches of their “persons, houses, and possessions.” Mississippi courts have long interpreted “possessions” to include all land you own and not just your home or the area right around it. That's a significant difference from federal law.
In Okhuysen, the Court reaffirmed that difference. It ruled that the code officer trespassed when he entered the property without a warrant, the owner’s permission, or exigent circumstances. The Mississippi Constitution, the Court said, does not make exceptions for “open fields” or areas away from a house.
What the Court’s Decision Means Going Forward
For homeowners and landowners across Mississippi, the Okhuysen decision means:
- Law enforcement officers can’t enter private land without consent or a warrant unless there are exigent circumstances.
- Evidence collected from a warrantless entry likely can’t be used against you.
- Mississippi’s Constitution provides stronger privacy protections than federal law.
If a law enforcement officer enters your property without permission, any action they take based on what they saw may be invalid later by a court.
The lawyers at Eichelberger Law Firm can help you understand your rights under both Mississippi and federal law. We defend homeowners and landowners from unlawful government overreach.