This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Kyllo v. United States: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=Supreme Court of the United States |date=June 11, 2001 |appealed_from=9th Circuit |case_treatment=No |facts=Police suspected Kyllo to be growing ma...") |
No edit summary |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|issues=Was the home of Kyllo unreasonably searched? | |issues=Was the home of Kyllo unreasonably searched? | ||
|holding=Thermal imaging of a home constitutes a "search" under the [[4th Amendment]] and may only be done with a search warrant. | |holding=Thermal imaging of a home constitutes a "search" under the [[4th Amendment]] and may only be done with a search warrant. | ||
|rule=When technology such as thermal imaging is used, then the Constitutional protections are strong. | |||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 19:47, September 16, 2022
Kyllo v. United States | |
Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | June 11, 2001 |
Appealed from | 9th Circuit |
Facts
Police suspected Kyllo to be growing marijuana in his home. They used a thermal imaging device to scan his home.
Based on this thermal imaging, a magistrate issued a search warrant to the home of Kyllo where police found marijuana cultivation. Kyllo had been using a heat lamp to warm the marijuana plants.Issues
Was the home of Kyllo unreasonably searched?
Holding
Thermal imaging of a home constitutes a "search" under the 4th Amendment and may only be done with a search warrant.
Rule
When technology such as thermal imaging is used, then the Constitutional protections are strong.