Kyllo V US

Background:

Danny Kyllo was suspected of growing marijuana in his triplex. a department of the interior agent used a thermal imaging device to look for hot-spots in the home made by high intensity lamps that are usually used for indoor marijuana growth. The scan showed that these hot-spots were present. Based on informants utility bills and the thermal imaging a judge issued a warrant and he was convicted  on a federal drug charge and after he tried to cover up  the evidence he was seized and entered a conditional guilty plea.

Issue:

Does the use of thermal scanning and imaging of the interior of someone's home violate the Fourth Amendment right?

Decision:

5V4 in favor of Kylo

M: Scalia

D: Stevens

The use of thermal scanning in homes was a violation of the Fourth Amendment right according to the Supreme Court

Opinion:

I agree with the Supreme Court's decision. Although the thermal imaging only showed globs of heat and nothing really personal it still is an intrusion of the person's privacy. Just like in Silverman V. U.S. in which a mic was put near a heating duct so that they could hear, It is the same thing. The mic did not show any personal things but it was steal ruled as unconstitutional. Just like how the thermal imaging was. Additionally if this were to be constitutional that would mean that the government can just look into anybody's house using thermal imaging.