Federal Court Approves Use of Hidden Surveillance Cameras on Private Property Without Warrants

The case surrounds Manuel Mendoza and Marco Magana of Green Bay, Wis. Both  Mendoza and Magana have been charged with federal drug crimes that carry  potential fines of up to $10 million along with life in prison.

Steven Curran, a DEA agent, claimed he discovered over 1,000 marijuana plants  on a 22-acre heavily wooded property owned by Magana. The defendants called on  Callahan to throw out the video evidence collected by the DEA based on the fact  that there were “No Trespassing” signs posted throughout the property along with  a locked gate, thus making the evidence collected a violation of the Fourth  Amendment.

Around four days after the DEA installed the surveillance cameras on Magana’s  property without a warrant, a magistrate judge granted a warrant for  surveillance. Mendoza and Magana’s attorneys rightfully pointed out that the  surveillance took place long before the warrant was actually granted.

Callahan made his recommendation based on Oliver v. United States, a 1984 Supreme Court case in  which the majority of justices ruled that “open fields” could indeed be searched  without obtaining a warrant. They based this decision on their claim that open  fields are not actually covered by the Fourth Amendment.

If the land is immediately surrounding a residence, on the other hand, it has  greater privacy protections based on a legal concept known as curtilage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *