CaseStudiesExam2 - Onsted v State Prohibition wanted to...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Onsted v. State : Prohibition, wanted to catch a suspect for bootlegging so federal agents phone tapped him, gathered evidence, and arrested him: It was appealed on basis of violation of privacy, but according to Trespass Doctrine, Federal agents never physically invaded Onsted’s persons, houses, papers, or effects. Ruling was upheld at USSC, and a dissent was written by Brandeis which later caused ruling to be reversed Katz v. United States : Reversed the Trespass Doctrine and developed the Privacy Doctrine Reversed due to: 1. Subjective expectation: the personal expectation one would have to reasonably believe the person on the phone was the only one hearing conversation 2. Objective expectation: society’s readiness to recognize the subjective expectation, if another person was in my shoes, would they expect that no one else was listening to conversation as well-- if it was row of pay phones instead of booth, there would be no expectation of privacy Arizona v. Hicks: Officer has search warrant to go in Apartment looking for a weapon, saw stereo equipment that looked ‘out of place’, turned equipment around to read serial number and find out if it was reported stolen (which it was) -- Didn’t follow plain view doctrine because serial number was not in plain view California v. Sorianello: Law Enforcement flew over a person’s backyard and saw weed growing, it was upheld because they saw it with the naked eye and didn’t enhance their vision with telescopes, etc. Hester v. United States: Suspected communist in hotel, checked out of room, and left stuff in trash that was incriminating evidence, was not reversed because it was considered abandoned property California v. Greenwood - An officer was watching him, and asks the neighborhood trash man for his garbage and finds evidence that Greenwood had been drug dealing.
Image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Spring '14
  • B.J.Houston
  • Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, reasonable suspicion, Searches and seizures, high crime area

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern