State v. Ghim

An individual has no protected privacy interest in business records held by a third-party service provider

Defendant appealed conviction for first-degree theft and aggravated first degree theft. On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress records obtained from the banks where he and codefendant wife had accounts. The facts are as follows: An investigator subpoenaed defendant and co-defendants bank records after receiving a complaint from a man who had given the couple $16,000 for real estate investments, but never receive a return on investment. From the records the investigator was able to determine more individuals who had invested with the defendants. On appeal defendant argued that defendant has a privacy right in the bank records notwithstanding that they are held by a third party. Defendant also attempts to demonstrate through unrelated Oregon statute that social and legal norms protect financial records. The court disagreed that a legislative decision to impose limited requirements for the disclosure of bank records should be read to set a Constitutional standard. The court found that an individual has no protected privacy interest in business records held by a third-party service provider. Affirmed.