Sunday, January 13, 2019

Kyllo v. United States case brief

    1. Kyllo v. United States case brief summary
      1. Officer Elliot came to suspect that weed was being grown in Kyllo’s home. Officer used thermal imagery to see if weed lamps were being used. The scan took a few minutes from the passenger seat of the police car.
      2. Based on informants, utility bills, the thermal imagery the magistrate issued a warrant authorizing a search
      3. Issue: officers on public street engaging in more than naked- eye surveillance of a home
      4. We do not know if there was probable cause
      5. Obtaining by sense-enhancing technology any info regarding the interior of the home that could not otherwise have been obtained without physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected area constitutes a SEARCH
        1. Yes, there is a search  
        2. Is the technology in general public use?
          1. If the general public has access to the technology, the respondent has no reasonable expectation of privacy to the heat he is putting off
          2. It is like how helicopters or drones are generally in public use therefore if you want privacy to put a roof on your grow house
          3. The court ties privacy to the general use of technology
      6. Gov: it only detects heat radiating from the external surface of the house
      7. Any physical invasion of home even by an inch is too much
      8. If we allowed this we would never know if the police would pick up intimate info or not
      9. Unlawful search
      10. DISSENT
        1. The observations were off the wall: the exterior of the home
        2. It did not constitute a physical penetration into the premises

Support us by: 
Visiting: to rid yourself of that almost criminal social media addiction. Checking out our amazing store on Etsy:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.