Does the exclusionary rule apply to private security personnel?

1 "(W)e recognize that in our state today illegal conduct of privately employed security personnel poses a threat to privacy rights of Californians that is comparable to that which may be posed by the unlawful conduct of police officers . . . the application of the exclusionary rule can be expected to have a deterrent effect. . . ." (People v. Zelinski, supra, 24 Cal.3d 357, 366, 155 Cal.Rptr. 575, 580, 594 P.2d 1000, 1005.) (Citations omitted.)

2 According to People v. Kaanehe, supra, 19 Cal.3d 1, 10, 136 Cal.Rptr. 409, 559 P.2d 1028, regardless of considerations of administrative burden, retroactivity is not proper unless the integrity of the fact-finding process is in question. The following language is apposite: