We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
FLORIDA V. JARDINES: TRESPASSING ON THE REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.
- Authors
Roth, David C.
- Abstract
The Fourth Amendment affords an individual's home robust protections from unreasonable searches. After all, the home is a highly private locus and deserves heightened protections because it is where our most personal and intimate activities occur. By finding in favor of the individual in Florida v. Jardines, the United States Supreme Court did not question this critical principle; a majority of the Justices concluded that absent a warrant, the police cannot bring a drug-sniffing dog into a home's curtilage to search for narcotics. The Jardines Court premised its decision on property and trespass law, determining that there had been a per se violation of the Fourth Amendment because the police gathered evidence by physically intruding onto Mr. Jardines' front porch. However, the majority's sole reliance on property law rendered its ruling incomplete. As Justice Kagan aptly noted in her concurring opinion, it would have been equally as appropriate to use privacy doctrine to resolve the case. The majority's purposeful disregard of that critical analysis leaves important questions unanswered and threatens to diminish Fourth Amendment protections. This Comment argues that the Court in Florida v. Jardines should have included an analysis of privacy doctrine and then discusses some of the implications that arise from its absence. Although the individual prevailed in Jardines, the majority's narrow focus on property and trespass law ignored an opportunity to overrule questionable cases and failed to create broadly applicable precedent. Furthermore, the decision threatens to diminish the Fourth Amendment protections of individuals who do not live in single-family detached homes with accompanying property rights. Lastly, the majority's neglect of a privacy analysis may send the message that it is unworthy of consideration, and may therefore limit the future application of critical privacy doctrine.
- Subjects
UNITED States; FLORIDA v. Jardines (Supreme Court case); TRESPASS -- Lawsuits &; claims; RIGHT of privacy; UNITED States. Constitution. 4th Amendment; SEARCHES &; seizures (Law); CANINE substance detection; SEARCH warrants (Law) -- Lawsuits &; claims; UNITED States. Supreme Court; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law)
- Publication
Denver University Law Review, 2014, Vol 91, Issue 2, p551
- ISSN
0883-9409
- Publication type
Article