CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - USE OF BINOCULARS AS CONSTITUTING AN UNREASONABLE SEARCH

• NCJ Number: 17706
• Journal: Oklahoma Law Review Volume: 27 Issue: 2 Dated: (SPRING 1974) Pages: 254-258
• Author(s): R A GROVE
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 5 pages
• Corporate Author: University of Oklahoma Press
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

REVIEW OF THE DIFFERENT RATIONALES BEHIND COURT RULINGS THAT IF OTHERWISE PROPERLY CONDUCTED, THE USE OF BINOCULARS DID NOT BY ITSELF RENDER THE SEARCH UNREASONABLE AND THEREFORE ILLEGAL.

Abstract

DISCUSSED ARE THE 'OPEN FIELDS' DOCTRINE RECOGNIZED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN HESTER V. UNITED STATES (1924) THAT THE SPECIAL PROTECTION ACCORDED BY THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE PEOPLE IN THEIR 'PERSONS, HOUSES, AND EFFECTS,' IS NOT EXTENDED TO THE OPEN FIELDS, AND THE 'PLAIN VIEW' DOCTRINE THAT AN OFFICER MAY OBSERVE WHATEVER WITHIN HIS PLACE WHERE HE HAS A RIGHT TO BE. ALSO CITED IS THE REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY STANDARD SET UP IN THE 1967 COURT DECISION IN KATZ V. UNITED STATES. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE KATZ DECISION WILL HINGE ON WHAT THE COURTS INTERPRET AS BEING 'REASONABLE'.