Show simple item record

dc.creatorJobe, Brian
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-16T18:50:44Z
dc.date.available2021-06-16T18:50:44Z
dc.date.issued1987
dc.identifier.citation18 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 1063en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/87009
dc.description.abstractAfter receiving a tip that Ciraolo was growing marijuana plants, police procured an airplane, flew over the property, and saw the plants. Subsequently, a search warrant was issued, the plants seized, and Ciraolo was arrested. The trial court allowed the evidence and Ciraolo was convicted. Eventually, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and determined that the warrantless, naked-eye aerial observation of areas within the curtilage does not constitute an unreasonable search under the fourth amendment.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTexas Tech Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectCommenten_US
dc.subjectCalifornia v. Ciraoloen_US
dc.subjectFourth amendmenten_US
dc.subjectUnreasonable searchen_US
dc.subjectSearch warrantsen_US
dc.subjectAerial surveillanceen_US
dc.subjectPublic airspaceen_US
dc.titleWarrantless Aerial Surveillance of the Curtilage from Public Airspace Does Not Violate the Fourth Amendment: California v. Ciraolo, ____ U.S. _____, 106 S. Ct. 1809, 90 L. Ed. 2d 210 (1986)en_US
dc.title.alternativeWarrantless Aerial Surveillance of the Curtilage from Public Airspace Does Not Violate the Fourth Amendmenten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record