NCJ Number
122003
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 58 Issue: 12 Dated: (December 1989) Pages: 18-24
Date Published
1989
Length
7 pages
Annotation
Factors in aerial surveillance techniques such as altitude, enhancement devices, and degree of intrusion are discussed in relation to their potential to violate privacy interests protected by the fourth amendment.
Abstract
Three cases of warrantless aerial surveillance upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court as not constituting intrusion into a reasonable expectation of privacy are outlined. Two cases involved observation of marijuana cultivation by the naked eye in one instance at 1,000 feet from private airplane and in the other at 400 feet from a helicopter. A third involved observation of a factory with a standard, floor-mounted precision aerial mapping camera. The Court warned against assuming that compliance with FAA regulations would automatically satisfy fourth amendment requirements. The factors it considered significant were type of property, frequency of other aircraft flights, steps taken to conceal property and activity from aerial observation, location of observer, sensory enhancement devices, and nature and degree of intrusion. References.