Kyllo+v.+United+States

Fourth Amendment

The Department of Interior agent used a thermal-imaging device to scan Danny Kyllo's triplex. Imaging was supposed to determine if the amount of heat coming from the house was consistent with the high-intensity lamps typically used for growing marijuana indoors. Imaging showed different hot areas around the house were existing, specifically the garage's roof and side wall. A federal magistrate judge issued a warrent to search Kyllo's home. The search showed that he, in fact, was growing marijuana. Kyllo was indicted on a federal drug charge. Kyllo unsuccessfully moved to suppress evidence seized from his home and then entered a conditional guilty plea. Court of Appeals held that "Kyllo had shown no subjective expectation of privacy because he held no attempt to conceal the heat escaping from his home".
 * Background:**


 * Majority Opinion**: In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court determined that the Government used a device that is not used by the general public and unless the house was intruded, they would have never known about the evidence. They ruled that it was unreasonable without a warrant.


 * Dissenting Opinion:** Justice Stevens and others believe that the Court's new rules with future technology does not follow the Fourth Amendment and that the search conducted was not perfectly reasonable.