NORRIS, Circuit Judge: Defendant-Appellant Danny Lee Kyllo was
convicted on one count of manufacturing marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841
(a) (1) and sentenced to 63 months. … We vacate this conviction and remand for further proceedings.
Who was Danny Kyllo?
Danny Kyllo was
convicted of growing marijuana in his home
in Western Oregon after federal agents found more than 100 plants.
What happened in Kyllo v United States?
United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001), held in a
5—4 decision which crossed ideological lines that the use of a thermal imaging, or FLIR, device from a public vantage point to monitor the radiation of heat from a person’s home
was a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and thus required a warrant.
What is the kyllo test?
A Department of the Interior agent, suspicious that Danny Kyllo was growing marijuana, used a thermal-imaging device to scan his triplex. The imaging was to be
used to determine if the amount of heat emanating from the home was consistent with the high-intensity lamps typically used for indoor marijuana growth
.
On what grounds did Scotus determine that the use of thermal imaging technology constituted a Fourth Amendment search?
On what grounds did SCOTUS determine that the use of thermal imaging technology constituted a Fourth Amendment search?
It provided information about the interior of the house that wouldn’t be available without physically entering.
What is the holding in Kyllo v United States?
The Court concluded that obtaining information regarding
the interior of a home
, which could not otherwise have been obtained without physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected area, such as Kyllo’s private residence, constituted a search, at least where the technology was not in general public use.
Who won California vs ciraolo?
Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, in which it ruled that warrantless aerial observation of a person’s backyard did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
What is the importance of Dickerson v United States?
United States, 530 U.S. 428 (2000),
upheld the requirement that the Miranda warning be read to criminal suspects and struck down a federal statute that purported to overrule Miranda v.
Arizona (1966).
What did the US Supreme Court decide in Oliver v us?
Open fields cannot support a reasonable expectation of privacy and are thus not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (1984), is a United States Supreme Court decision relating to
the open fields doctrine limiting the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
.
What did the court say in the case of chimel v California?
In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that
the search of Chimel’s house was unreasonable under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments
. The Court reasoned that searches “incident to arrest” are limited to the area within the immediate control of the suspect.
What types of cases does the Supreme Court typically agree to hear?
Typically, the Court hears
cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state
(if the state court decided a Constitutional issue). The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.
What is thermal imaging technology?
Thermal imaging uses
a sensor to convert the radiation into a visible light picture
. Not only does this picture help us identify objects in total darkness, or through dense smoke, but the sensor information can be used to measure temperature differences as well.
What happens if the 4th Amendment is violated?
What if My Fourth Amendment Rights Are Violated? …
An arrest is found to violate
the Fourth Amendment because it was not supported by probable cause or a valid warrant. Any evidence obtained through that unlawful arrest, such as a confession, will be kept out of the case.
What was the 4th Amendment?
The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment,
protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government
. The Fourth Amendment, however, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law.
What is the exclusionary rule?
The exclusionary rule
prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution
. The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Which of the following is an example of a Terry stop?
Smell
: When a law enforcement officer detects odors that may indicate criminal activity, a Terry stop may be justified. Field Example: An officer talking to a motorist who requested directions smells what he or she thinks is marijuana emanating from the inside of the vehicle.
