ATTENTION: The software behind KU ScholarWorks is being upgraded to a new version. Starting July 15th, users will not be able to log in to the system, add items, nor make any changes until the new version is in place at the end of July. Searching for articles and opening files will continue to work while the system is being updated. If you have any questions, please contact Marianne Reed at mreed@ku.edu .

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCorse, John
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T13:35:23Z
dc.date.available2014-05-27T13:35:23Z
dc.date.issued1987-01-01
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1808/13736
dc.descriptionThis is the published version.
dc.description.abstractLaw enforcement officials have increasingly turned to aerial surveillance as a means of combating crime. Aerial surveillance often enables police to view areas that they otherwise would be unable to view without a warrant. Consequently, considerable conflict has developed over whether this means of surveillance constitutes a search under the fourth amendment. In California v. Ciraolo, the United States Supreme Court held that naked-eye aerial observations of the curtilage of a home, when made from navigable airspace, do not constitute a search protected by the fourth amendment.
dc.publisherUniversity of Kansas School of Law, Criminal Justice Clinic
dc.titleAerial Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment – California v. Ciraolo
dc.typeArticle
kusw.kuauthorCorse, John
kusw.kudepartmentLaw
kusw.oastatusna
kusw.oaversionScholarly/refereed, publisher version
kusw.oapolicyThis item does not meet KU Open Access policy criteria.
dc.rights.accessrightsopenAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record