Papers
1/14/13
Business Law
Unit 3 Assignment 1: Fourth Amendment Case Study
The delta City Police Department obtained evidence using the “Snort scope 500” in similar ways that Government used "thermal imager” in the Kyllo case. The 4th amendment states the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable government intrusions. In the “Kyllo vs. United states” case after Kyllo was indicted for manufacturing marijuana, a violation of federal criminal law. Kyllo moved to suppress the imaging evidence and the evidence it let to, arguing that it was an unreasonable search that violated the Fourth Amendment to the U.S Constitution. There was a device used that if otherwise not used would not be able to detect the use of any illegal doing in the privacy of the home. This makes the search warrant unreasonable being that it was obtained using measures that could not be openly available. This takes away from the privacy of the person’s home if the government uses devices to spy into the person’s personal home use. This case brings up the question “What limits there are upon this power of technology to shrink the realm of guaranteed privacy.” We think that obtaining by sense-enhancing technology any information regarding the interior of the home that could not otherwise have been obtained without physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected area. This assures preservation of that degree of privacy against government that existed when the Fourth Amendment was adopted. In the case of Kyllo the U.S Supreme Court held that the use of a thermal-imaging device aimed at private home from public street to detect relative amounts of heat with the home is a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Thus they required a warrant. Because the police in this case did not have a warrant, the Court reversed Kyllo's conviction for growing marijuana. In the Delta City Police Department case similar means was used without having a search
Business Law
Unit 3 Assignment 1: Fourth Amendment Case Study
The delta City Police Department obtained evidence using the “Snort scope 500” in similar ways that Government used "thermal imager” in the Kyllo case. The 4th amendment states the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable government intrusions. In the “Kyllo vs. United states” case after Kyllo was indicted for manufacturing marijuana, a violation of federal criminal law. Kyllo moved to suppress the imaging evidence and the evidence it let to, arguing that it was an unreasonable search that violated the Fourth Amendment to the U.S Constitution. There was a device used that if otherwise not used would not be able to detect the use of any illegal doing in the privacy of the home. This makes the search warrant unreasonable being that it was obtained using measures that could not be openly available. This takes away from the privacy of the person’s home if the government uses devices to spy into the person’s personal home use. This case brings up the question “What limits there are upon this power of technology to shrink the realm of guaranteed privacy.” We think that obtaining by sense-enhancing technology any information regarding the interior of the home that could not otherwise have been obtained without physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected area. This assures preservation of that degree of privacy against government that existed when the Fourth Amendment was adopted. In the case of Kyllo the U.S Supreme Court held that the use of a thermal-imaging device aimed at private home from public street to detect relative amounts of heat with the home is a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Thus they required a warrant. Because the police in this case did not have a warrant, the Court reversed Kyllo's conviction for growing marijuana. In the Delta City Police Department case similar means was used without having a search