Captured Without Consent: Reckoning With Non-Volitional Disclosures Around the Home in Long-Term Pole Camera Cases

Journal

American University Law Review Forum

Volume

74

Abstract

This Comment argues that courts reasoning whether long-term pole camera surveillance of a home is a Fourth Amendment search should not apply the public observation doctrine because entering and exiting one’s home is not volitional. It compares long-term pole camera cases to Carpenter v. United States, where the court did not apply the third-party doctrine upon determining that cell phone usage was not volitional. The author argues that if the public observation doctrine was applied to long-term pole camera cases, residents would have to achieve secrecy to secure privacy protection around their homes.

Share

COinS