CRIM 2100 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Pen Register, Telephone Tapping, Thermographic Camera

24 views2 pages

champagnemallard501

3 Apr 2016

School

Northeastern University

Department

Criminal Justice

Course

CRIM 2100

Professor

Larsen Krista

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Facts: us agent suspected peiioner was growing marijuana in his home. He used a thermal imager to scan the home for unusual amounts of infrared light related to high intensity grow lamps used to grow marijuana. Agent"s indings concluded peiioner"s house was using halide lights to grow, obtained warrant to search the home, and discovered over 100 marijuana plants were indeed being grown. Ph: peiioner unsuccessfully moved to suppress evidence obtained from thermal imager used without a warrant on grounds that its culivaion violated his 4th rights. Issues: whether use of thermal-imaging device aimed at private home from a public street to detect relaive amounts of heat within home consitutes a search within meaning of 4th. Decision: yes, obtaining any informaion about the interior of a home using sense-enhancing technology that is not in general public use consitutes a search. Facts: woman was under suspicion of traicking narcoics and then targeted in an fbi invesigaion.

Related Questions

1. Suspicious that marijuana was being grown in eventual defendant DK's home, federal agents used a thermal imaging device to scan his home from a public street. The agents sought to determine whether the amount of heat emanating from the home (which was part of a triplex) was consistent with the amount emanated from high-intensity lamps typically used for indoor marijuana growth. The scan showed that the roof and a side wall were relatively hot compared with the rest of the home and substantially warmer than the neighboring units. Based in part on the thermal imaging results, a federal magistrate judge issued a warrant to search the home, where the agents found marijuana growing. After being indicted on a federal drug charge, DK unsuccessfully moved to suppress the evidence seized from his home. He then entered a conditional guilty plea under which, on appeal, he could challenge the use of the thermal imaging device and the validity of the resulting warrant. The government took the position that the use of the device, when operated from a public street, was not a search for purposes of the Fourth Amendment and that DK, therefore, did not have a basis for his Fourth Amendment-based challenge. Was the government correct in this argument?

2. Mann was the attorney for the Town of Rye, a New York community. He filed a defamation lawsuit against a newspaper that served the Rye area and against the writer of that newspaper's Town Crier column. Mann based his case on statements that appeared in the column. The writer of the column referred to Mann as a "political hatchet man" and as "one of the biggest powers behind the throne in local government". The writer also asserted that "Mann pulls the strings" and raised the question of whether Mann was "leading the Town of Rye to destruction." What arguments should the defendants make to avoid defamation liability? Should Mann win his case?

Thanks! need a good start on these

ochreferret730

CRIM 2100 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Pen Register, Telephone Tapping, Thermographic Camera

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

CRIM 2100 Lecture Notes - Lecture 5: Grow House, Appellate Court, Methamphetamine

POLS 354 Lecture Notes - Lecture 7: Detection Dog, Fourth Amendment To The United States Constitution, Curtilage

LAW 605 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Thermographic Camera, Aisle, Metropcs

Related Questions