details down below Mode:6-2 crime

Jasper robs the home of Peter and Carly, two meth dealers. He steals expensive jewelry, meth equipment, and meth. You are the assigned detective to
the robbery and receive a reliable tip that Jasper has stashed the goods in his home. You want to use thermal imaging to detect the presence of the stolen items.
A senior detective advises you that you do not need a warrant. Based upon your reading of Kyllo v. United States, what should you do? How does the court’s
decision reinforce ethical behavior and constitutional limits on law-enforcement officers? Write a journal assignment that addresses these questions. Refer to
your textbook and relevant scholarly sources to support the points and observations made in your journal assignment.
Guidelines for Submission: Your journal assignment must be 300–400 words (excluding the references). Citations should be formatted according to APA style.
Submit assignment as a Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins.

CASE SUMMERIE:::::::::

Procedural Posture

Petitioner was indicted of manufacturing marijuana after police discovered an indoor growing operation using a thermal-imaging device from the street. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of petitioner’s motion to suppress. Petition for writ of certiorari was granted to determine whether the thermal-imaging was a search under U.S. Const. amend. IV.

Overview

The police had aimed a thermal-imaging device at petitioner’s residence after a police detective suspected that petitioner was growing marijuana. Based on the thermal-imaging information, police obtained a search warrant for the residence. The lower court held that petitioner had shown no subjective expectation of privacy as he had made no attempt to conceal the heat escaping from his home and even if he had, there was no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy because the imager did not expose any intimate details of petitioner’s life. The appellate court concluded that obtaining information regarding the interior of the home that could not otherwise have been obtained without physical intrusion into a constitutionally protected area, such as petitioner’s private residence, constituted a search, at least where the technology was not in general public use. Since thermal imaging technology was not in general public use, such a surveillance was a search and was presumptively unreasonable without a warrant. Whether the search warrant was supported by probable cause without the surveillance evidence was for the trial court to determine in the first instance.

Outcome

Judgment was reversed and the case was remanded.