open fields doctrine (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

open fields doctrine in Ohio

6 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2023 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Hester v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1924 · cited in 5 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 1981–2023
2 sentences

2017The marijuana growing in the woods is subject to the open-fields doctrine first enunciated by the United States Supreme Court in Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 , 44 S.Ct. 445 , 68 L.Ed. 898 (1924), wherein the court found that even though there -6- had been a trespass by police officers, no illegal search or seizure occurred because the Fourth Amendment protection afforded to people in their "persons, homes, papers, and effects" is not extended to "open fields." Id. at 59 .

2017The marijuana growing in the woods is subject to the open-fields doctrine first enunciated by the United States Supreme Court in Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 , 44 S.Ct. 445 , 68 L.Ed. 898 (1924), wherein the court found that even though there -6- had been a trespass by police officers, no illegal search or seizure occurred because the Fourth Amendment protection afforded to people in their "persons, homes, papers, and effects" is not extended to "open fields." Id. at 59 .

15
Katz v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1967 · cited in 2 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 1981–1992
2 sentences

1992The trial court then stated, quoting Katz v. United States (1967), 389 U.S. 347, 360 , 88 S.Ct. 507, 516 , 19 L.Ed.2d 576, 587 , that “the touchstone of the Fourth Amendment analysis is whether a person has a ‘constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.’ ” The trial court ultimately held: “ * * * [Defendant's motion is granted in part and overruled in part.

1981See Katz, supra, at 351 ; Lewis v. United States, 385 U.S. 206, 210 (1966); United States v. Lee, 274 U.S. 559, 563 (1927); Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 58-59 (1924).” Appellant, appellee and the trial court recognized that there is a conflict among several of the circuit and state courts relative to the viability of the open fields doctrine.

12
Bryce McDowell v. United Statesgreen
ca8 · 1967 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992
1 sentence

1992See United States v. Dunn (1987), 480 U.S. 294 , 107 S.Ct. 1134 , 94 L.Ed.2d 326 , 5 and McDowell v. United States (C.A.8, 1967), 383 F.2d 599 . 6 The McDowell court in so holding stated that: “The contention of appellants that the fields were entitled to the protection of the Fourth Amendment as being within the curtilage of a commercial enterprise is without merit.

11
United States v. Dunngreen
scotus · 1987 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992
2 sentences

1992See United States v. Dunn (1987), 480 U.S. 294 , 107 S.Ct. 1134 , 94 L.Ed.2d 326 , 5 and McDowell v. United States (C.A.8, 1967), 383 F.2d 599 . 6 The McDowell court in so holding stated that: “The contention of appellants that the fields were entitled to the protection of the Fourth Amendment as being within the curtilage of a commercial enterprise is without merit.

1992See United States v. Dunn (1987), 480 U.S. 294 , 107 S.Ct. 1134 , 94 L.Ed.2d 326 , 5 and McDowell v. United States (C.A.8, 1967), 383 F.2d 599 . 6 The McDowell court in so holding stated that: “The contention of appellants that the fields were entitled to the protection of the Fourth Amendment as being within the curtilage of a commercial enterprise is without merit.

11
United States v. Leegreen
scotus · 1927 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981
1 sentence

1981See Katz, supra, at 351 ; Lewis v. United States, 385 U.S. 206, 210 (1966); United States v. Lee, 274 U.S. 559, 563 (1927); Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 58-59 (1924).” Appellant, appellee and the trial court recognized that there is a conflict among several of the circuit and state courts relative to the viability of the open fields doctrine.

11
Lewis v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1967 · cited in 1 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981
1 sentence

1981See Katz, supra, at 351 ; Lewis v. United States, 385 U.S. 206, 210 (1966); United States v. Lee, 274 U.S. 559, 563 (1927); Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57, 58-59 (1924).” Appellant, appellee and the trial court recognized that there is a conflict among several of the circuit and state courts relative to the viability of the open fields doctrine.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Oliver v. United States green
scotus · 1984
2 sentences

1992Appellant submitted that pursuant to the open fields doctrine of Oliver v. United States (1984), 466 U.S. 170 , 104 S.Ct. 1735 , 80 L.Ed.2d 214 , the Fourth Amendment does not extend to protect such areas, even when a trespass has been committed.

1992Appellant submitted that pursuant to the open fields doctrine of Oliver v. United States (1984), 466 U.S. 170 , 104 S.Ct. 1735 , 80 L.Ed.2d 214 , the Fourth Amendment does not extend to protect such areas, even when a trespass has been committed.

21992–1999
Florida v. Riley green
scotus · 1989
2 sentences

2023I respectfully dissent from the majority's assertion in paragraph 32 that "we find no reason to distinguish the use of the drone in this case from other air surveillance." As the majority notes, this is an emerging area of the law and there is reason to think there may indeed be material distinction. {¶ 36} In Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 452 , 109 S.Ct. 693 , 102 L.Ed.2d 835 (1989), five members of the court agreed surveillance by helicopter over a subject's property at an altitude of at least 400 feet did not require a search warrant.

2023I respectfully dissent from the majority's assertion in paragraph 32 that "we find no reason to distinguish the use of the drone in this case from other air surveillance." As the majority notes, this is an emerging area of the law and there is reason to think there may indeed be material distinction. {¶ 36} In Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445, 452 , 109 S.Ct. 693 , 102 L.Ed.2d 835 (1989), five members of the court agreed surveillance by helicopter over a subject's property at an altitude of at least 400 feet did not require a search warrant.

12023–2023
United States v. Harold Loyd Vasser green
ca9 · 1981
1 sentence

2023Id., quoting Vasser, 648 F.2d at 510 . {¶55} Nevertheless, Simon argues that the trial court erred by applying the open-fields doctrine to justify the intrusion.

12023–2023
Air Pollution Variance Bd. of Colo. v. Western Alfalfa Corp. green
scotus · 1974
2 sentences

1992Alfalfa Corp. (1974), 416 U.S. 861 , 94 S.Ct. 2114 , 40 L.Ed.2d 607 , the United States Supreme Court specifically applied the open fields doctrine to outdoor commercial property.

1992Alfalfa Corp. (1974), 416 U.S. 861 , 94 S.Ct. 2114 , 40 L.Ed.2d 607 , the United States Supreme Court specifically applied the open fields doctrine to outdoor commercial property.

11992–1992

Where else courts name it

PA 11 (1986–2023) NE 8 (1981–2014) GA 7 (1981–2013) LA 6 (1978–2009) FL 6 (1981–1997) OH 6 (1981–2023) TX 5 (1976–2023) TN 5 (1977–2017) AL 5 (1974–1990) NY 5 (1980–1994) CA 5 (1973–2000) MO 4 (1984–2014) WI 3 (2000–2017) WA 3 (1984–1994) MD 3 (1984–2002) IL 3 (1979–1990) OK 3 (1992–2002) VT 2 (1991–1993) VA 2 (1998–2016) MN 2 (1988–2003) MT 2 (1995–1997) ME 2 (1982–2022) OR 2 (1987–1988)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check