Does the exclusionary rule apply to evidence obtained by a private citizen?

The trial court made a finding that Stephens was a trespasser on defendant's property at the times pertinent to this case. Nonetheless, it is clear that the resolution of this appeal does not turn on the application of principles relating to the rights of trespassers. (People v. Krivda (1971) 5 Cal.3d 357, 365, 96 Cal.Rptr. 62, 486 P.2d 1262.)

It is a well settled rule that the exclusionary rule founded on the Fourth Amendment is designed to prevent governmental action and does not extend to cases where evidence has been seized or obtained by a private citizen unless that citizen was then acting as an agent for the government. (People v. Topp (1974) 40 Cal.App.3d 372, 377, 114 Cal.Rptr. 856; People v. Jackson (1970) 14 Cal.App.3d 57, 65--66, 92 Cal.Rptr. 91.)