This one is for those who think “who will know”…The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s allowance of electronic video surveillance equipment as used by law enforcement to catch someone living where he was not registered.
In United States v. STEFANYUK, the defendant was charged with failure to register (among other things). To catch him living where he wasn’t, Homeland Security installed electronic video surveillance equipment (“EVSE”) across the street from his home. Without a warrant they put up a hidden pole camera 15 feet off the ground in a public right of way facing the house. The camera operated for two weeks; it could pan, tilt, and zoom, but not see inside the house.
The Defendant tried to suppress the surveillance evidence, arguing that “warrantless long-term around-the-clock video recordings and surveillance of [his] home violated his Fourth Amendment rights.” The lower court dismissed and the appeals court affirmed.
In America, there is an expectation of privacy in the 4th Amendment. I keep hearing that there is no expectation of privacy in public, so you can video someone and there is nothing they can do about it. But that is not true, the Supreme Court of the United States has set limits.
In Carpenter v United States, a federal district court granted a motion to suppress evidence, ruling that police use of a “pole camera” represented a search under the Fourth Amendment. Also, citing Carpenter v United States, SCOTUS held that the government’s warrantless searches of historical cell-site service for more than 7 days violated the fourth amendment.
In United States v. Moore-Bush, the government placed a camera on a utility pole across the street from the house of a suspect in a criminal investigation. The camera was used for eight months to surveil the driveway and the front of the house. Law enforcement argued that the use of the camera did not constitute a search because police are allowed to monitor the comings and goings of individuals in public without a warrant. The court ruled that this was a violation of the suspect’s 4th amendment rights because; (1) using a pole-mounted camera gave the government continuous video recording for approximately eight months; (2) focused on the driveway and front of the house; (3) had the ability to zoom in so close that it can read license plate numbers; and (4) created a digitally searchable log. Taken together, these features permit the Government to piece together intimate details of a suspect’s life. Further, it differentiated between surveillance cameras and security cameras. Because surveillance cameras are not used to protect against crime, they are restricted under the 4th amendment.
In United States v Jones, SCOTUS concurred that the unique nature of pole-mounted cameras, particularly its capability to be remotely adjusted and its ability to create a digitally searchable log, allows the government to piece together intimate details of a person’s life, and needs to be restricted.
In a related case, Riley v California, SCOTUS held that cops cannot search a cell phone without a warrant. Justice Roberts wrote that the warrantless search exception following an arrest exists for the purposes of protecting officer safety and preserving evidence, neither of which is at issue in the search of digital data. The digital data cannot be used as a weapon to harm an arresting officer, and police officers have the ability to preserve evidence while awaiting a warrant.
So, it’s obvious that the SCOTUS has set limits on surveillance using digital technology, and that pole-mounted surveillance cameras have a very limited leeway, such as short duration (7 days?). So how is it that lower courts could rule in favor of law enforcement and against SCOTUS decisions?
I am not a lawyer, and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. However, after reading these cases, I really do wonder why law enforcement continues to get away with blatant constitutional violations and individual’s rights continue to be violated.
The circuit court did not rule against these SCOTUS decisions. In fact, they did not rule anything on this issue at all. They upheld the trial court’s decision, but for reasons unrelated to surveillance.
The headline here, “8th Circuit affirms use of surveillance equipment,” does not seem correct.
The court did NOT rule that this surveillance was OK. They simply let a district court ruling stand, for other reasons entirely. If you google the opinion. But they did not hold anything either way on this issue.
The issue of whether this sort of warrantless use of electronic video surveillance equipment constitutes an unreasonable search, has yet to be decided at the federal appellate court level
He obviously has something the Feds are watching him for, as DHS doesn’t just survey you for simple crimes unless they are after you for something big.
I want “homeland security” to secure our boarders and make sure people aren’t getting on planes with the intent of flying them into buildings. Homeland security should NOT be about STALKING the common man for a criminal act or the assumption of a criminal act. Leave that to the LOCAL authorities.
Nor should the NSA be monitoring Americans cell phones, Internet usage, and emails, but….
The state Wasted how much of Taxpayer money? $50-100K at least on one person?
Was even ONE Domestic Violence situation prevented during this time? OH RIGHT. Police officers are the BIGGEST domestic violence offenders, so of course they wouldn’t want the spotlight on what they do best.
If I see another Dating App profile claiming “Cops” swipe left (meaning girls strongly don’t like cops after dating them), I’m going to start posting it publicly because it is so damn common to see. I have never seen so many women blatantly write how much they dislike dating cops, specially cops.
Interestingly enough, the other day a cop in a grocery store that we have here said something off-the-cuff, that he doesn’t yell at customers, only his girlfriend. This was a “half-joking” off the cuff statement. You can imagine the truth, if this was just a quick comment to a random customer.
These guys are some of the Worst Offenders. Here we are spending $50-100K on installing, monitoring and prosecuting a CP offender who didn’t register correctly while REAL abusers are walking around perfectly free.
Remember Americans: it is stupidity like this which will further drive the USA into Bankruptcy which it already is headed for. The amount of gross waste in the government or law enforcement is just absolutely disgusting.
How many millions of dollars are states paying for those useless registries??
SHAME ON THIS COUNTRY.
Its a game people. And, like any other game there are winners and losers. If you don’t want to lose then play by the rules. If you start thinking that you can beat the game that is when you find yourself back behind bars crying about how Law Enforcement was being so mean and unfair. The law didn’t tell this person not to register his new address he decided not to register and that was the problem not the police.
The problem I have with this incident is that he like so many others get into trouble by not being in compliance, thinking they can beat the system, then cry about it after, all the while making our efforts at changing public opinion about our issues that much more difficult.
This guy needs our scorn not our sympathy. All of the efforts of FAC, of individuals involved in FAC, and of other organization are negatively affected by incidents like this. Please, if you want to call out society or law enforcement about their treatment of RP then lets first be honest with ourselves about the behavior of others who damage our cause.
Sentinel, All I can add is HALLELUJAH to your comment. I typically end up in “discussions” with fellow RP’s when I go back to the counseling program I completed a couple years ago. I go back as a “peer counselor”. Some times there’s a groan when I show up because I’m usually unsympathetic to the bitching & whining that goes on.
My wife is used to me venting every time I see a story on the TV or read an article regarding a RP committing another offense or violating a statute or ordinance. If it’s truly an inadvertent offense I’m critical of the law but more often it’s the result of someone intentionally flaunting the rules. My anger comes from MY opinion that these idiots do noting but reinforce the social stigmas, “See, I told you we needed these laws to monitor and control these vile predators”…….. We gain 10 yards for a first down but then somebody does something stupid and it sets us back 20 yards. As RP’s we only hurt ourselves with this type of behavior.
Hmmm, I think I agree with you to some extent, but I’m not even sure. I’d need to think more deeply about it all.
It seems the worst thing that could occur as a result of things like this is that the criminal regimes think that more laws are needed. Or that more “compliance checks” need to be done. I suppose that is the worst. What the criminal regimes should be doing is ignoring their Registries as much as possible. But I think these types of things probably do cause them to waste more resources.
But I am happy if the general public thinks that Registry laws are ignored or that they are not effective. I think that is good. Except to the extent that their bitching & whining often emboldens the criminal legislators to try even more and more illegal “laws”. But other than that, I hope the general public thinks that Registries are just another big government failure.
These “laws” deserve nothing but contempt and disrespect. The ONLY reason to even consider following them is to neutralize their weapon. That said, I do follow all of the laws precisely so the criminal regimes cannot attack me. But I will tell them and the general public how useless their laws are and how I legally go around them.
I’m not going to scorn anyone who breaks Registries “laws”. Those people are heroes to me.
And it is people like you that makes it possible for the corruption to continue. This man’s rights were violated. Yes, he broke the law and yes he should go to jail, but not because law enforcement broke the law themselves to catch him in the act. How many thousands of dollars were wasted in this fiasco when they could have used that to catch REAL criminals who are a REAL threat. I have lost count how many times something like this happened while an innocent victim was harmed or killed only blocks away that could have been prevented and nine times out of ten the creep got away with it. The Constitution was written for a reason and it protects everyone, not just the people who think are obeying the law. If you really knew the law I bet you would find out you break many laws every day. Should you be hounded and spied on illegally for it? How would you feel if this happened to you or someone you love? Think before you stick your foot in your mouth.
@ D. Martinez,
Law enforcement do not need a warrant to place video surveillance in a public setting. Even though it’s aimed at the home it’s field of view was a small step up from what anyone would see from the street.
I do agree that the resources spent could’ve gone on to better use elsewhere. As noted earlier this is a game and you are an unwilling participant.
Until things change for the better, play by their rules or run the risk of being caught. OR… move to a country that isn’t so silly.
I don’t know I’m with you but I’m not. I say if the rules are stupid and they make the game unfair we ALL stand against them in court and out of court. It’s a delicate situation. It’s easy to enforce the registration rule when the majority adhere and the minority don’t. It’s easy for the cops to catch one guy speeding down the highway. But if every car that drives down that road is speeding during rush hour then what? We as people gotta begin to stand up and unite as a while nationwide. I’m all for going about it through the legal system but when the rules and people who make them are against you you begin to see they modify the game to their advantage. Along with court battles we need to make some noise. The radical route would be every offender in the nation saying we aren’t registering, we aren’t putting sides in our yard, we aren’t sitting in the back of the bus any more. The passive route is through the great work that fac and other orginazations are doing. What’s the balance?
I already know FAC’s position on this: comply with the law!
And who here will be the first to volunteer to be separated from their families and have their dirty laundry aired on the nightly news, just to make a point?
Has a failure to register ever resulted in public support for reducing/eliminating registration? Imagine the opportunity for law enforcement, elected officials, and the news media, were there a “mass failure to register.”
This is an area of case law that must still be developing. I found this decision out of the 1st Circuit:
U.S. v. MOORE-BUSH
In this case, the continuous use of surveillance for 8 months, combined with other factors, enabled the government to create an intimate log of the activities of those under surveillance, and the court’s decision went in favor of the defendants.
James
Good research, thanks
It is indeed. This site covers topics dealing with the issue on a (fairly) regular basis, if you are interested in following:
https://www.techdirt.com/
Below is a link to a story about a similar situation involving drugs. Not sure what to make of it all but it looks like Candid Camera is back in business and it depends on where you are as to what is legal. HS being involved I am thinking this person had other issues going on with the Feds.
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/12/14/colorado-court-appeals-overturns-drug-conviction-surveillance/
WOW. As we fight for our rights, we continually face more. What reason did DHS “Without a warrant they put up a hidden pole camera 15 feet off the ground in a public right of way facing the house.”?
Is this according to their mission of “The Department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation….” (https://www.dhs.gov/about-dhs).
Will the nation once be secure if ALL citizens are watched 24/7? Can you say China? Can you say Police State? Wake up USA.
“The lower court dismissed and the appeals court affirmed.” Court judges have been dismissed because they “disagree” with the public in lieu of constitutional rights…. are all public officials now scared of their jobs and willing to do so instead of defending the Constitution?
Federal judges aren’t scared of losing their jobs because they are appointed for LIFE. But all too many times, they side with prosecutors and against anyone charged with a sex offense to keep their own legacies in tact.
They had to have had some suspicion based on something, probably a neighbor made a complaint or an officer noticed every time “he” went to visit or serve papers the guy was never home.
He was being investigated for CP.
Big brother is watching you. Beware . That’s what comes with being a red letter marked outcast from society.
Why don’t they install cameras across the street from convicted drug dealers???
Oh….what was I thinking? My bad!!!!!
That would cause the police too much work arresting re-offenders and the courts and prosecutors would be much more weighed down than what they already are.
I guess you have to select what is the most viable in the public eyes of making them believe you are doing the most good even when it isn’t.
Big Brother indeed! He has been here for a long time. I am afraid that this country is lost and there is no way back from the police/surveillance state. The Dept of Homeland Defense is really nothing more than a modern day SS. Taken to its logical extent, we all will be personally watched 24/7 and will have to “answer” for anything we do that is not dictated by this bloated, out of control, and arrogant government. Time to wake up people! I helped get the Vietnam war stopped. Its time to organize and stop this BULLSHIT! There are approx ONE MILLION people on the S.O. registry. That is a powerful number! Lets get after it folks!