Facts of the Case
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. Subsequently, the imaging revealed that relatively hot areas existed, compared to the rest of the home. Based on informants, utility bills, and the thermal imaging, a federal magistrate judge issued a warrant to search Kyllo's home. The search unveiled growing marijuana. After Kyllo was indicted on a federal drug charge, he unsuccessfully moved to suppress the evidence seized from his home and then entered a conditional guilty plea. Ultimately affirming, the Court of Appeals held that Kyllo had shown no subjective expectation of privacy because he had made no attempt to conceal the heat escaping from his home, and even if he had, there was no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy because the imager "did not expose any intimate details of Kyllo's life," only "amorphous 'hot spots' on the roof and exterior wall."
Questions
Does the use of a thermal-imaging device to detect relative amounts of heat emanating from a private home constitute an unconstitutional search in violation of the Fourth Amendment?
Conclusions
-
Yes. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that "[w]here, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a 'search' and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant." In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that the "observations were made with a fairly primitive thermal imager that gathered data exposed on the outside of [Kyllo's] home but did not invade any constitutionally protected interest in privacy," and were, thus, "information in the public domain."
GEDMatch and the Fourth Amendment: No Warrant Required
He murdered 13 people, raped at least 50 women, and committed burglaries all across California...
State Court Docket Watch: State v. Nettles
State Court Docket Watch: 2020 Edition
The Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Nettles[1] illustrates what happens when decades-old law...
Fourth Circuit (Over Dissent): No Taking When Maryland Outlawed "Rapid Fire Trigger Activators"
Maryland outlawed "rapid fire trigger activators" ("devices that, when attached to a firearm, increase its...
Why NSA’s Bulk Data Seizures Are Illegal and Unconstitutional
Why NSA’s Bulk Data Seizures Are Illegal and Unconstitutional Randy E. Barnett* & Jim Harper**...
A Comprehensive Strategy Targeting Recidivist Criminals with Continuous Real-Time GPS Monitoring: Is Reverse Engineering Crime Control Possible?
Engage Volume 12, Issue 3, November 2011
One of the most pressing criminal justice challenges facing the nation is reducing the incidence...