Oliver Vs Dunn 1979

791 Words 4 Pages
Issue: Was the evidence obtained for a search warrant obtained through an illegal search? If the search is found to be illegal, should all the evidence gathered be suppressed?
Cases: The Fourth Amendment details legal searches and seizures and the right to ban illegally obtained evidence in court. There are three questions that are addressed when dealing with Fourth Amendment searches. Was the law enforcement act a search, if it was a search was it reasonable, and if it was found unreasonable, is the evidence banned from court? In determining if there was a search, we must look into the open fields doctrine. In Oliver v. U.S. (1984) it was determined that expectation of privacy does not extend to open fields, however it does extend to curtilage. In the U.S. v. Dunn (1987) case, The Court implemented criteria that goes as followed to determine curtilage, presence of a fence, distance from the house, purpose of area, and measures of privacy taken. In Ronald Dunn’s case the area in question was a barn that was sixty yards from his house and fifty yards behind a fence. It was not in use for family activities and no measures were taken to obscure the barn from view. The Court concluded that the barn was not curtilage. If a search did take place, then the reasonableness test will
…show more content…
Precedent cases are Weeks v. U.S. (1914) and Mapp v. Ohio (1961). In Weeks case officers broke into his home while he was away and seized his private papers. In the case of Mapp, officers broke into Mapp’s home while Mapp was coming to the door. A paper that was claimed to be a warrant was presented and Mapp was arrested when trying to take the warrant. Then a search took place and obscene materials were found. In both of these cases evidence was ban from court due to the illegal searches and seizures. A bright-line rule stated that any evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible in

Related Documents