United States v. Craig Alan Castaneda  ·  2021-05-19  ·  Eleventh Circuit  ·  pin 256 U.S. at 465

“Burdeau . . . has made it clear that the fourth amendment was intended as a restraint on the activities of the government and its agents and is not addressed to actions, legal or illegal, of private parties.”

State v. Romano  ·  2017-06-09  ·  Supreme Court of North Carolina  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 41 S. Ct. at 574

“Anything done by a government; . . . an intrusion on a person’s rights . . . by a governmental entity . . . .”

United States v. Crist  ·  2008-10-22  ·  M.D. Pennsylvania  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 256 L. Ed. at 465

“[The Fourth Amendment’s] origin and history clearly show that it was intended as a restraint upon the activities of sovereign authority, and was not intended to be a limitation upon other than governmental agencies .... ”

Miles v. State  ·  2007-10-17  ·  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 256 L. Ed. at 465

"The Fourth Amendment gives protection against unlawful searches and seizures, and . . . its protection applies to governmental action. Its origin and history clearly show that it was intended as a restraint upon the activities of sovereign authority[.]"

Smith v. Goord  ·  2006-01-30  ·  W.D. New York  ·  3 pin-cites  ·  pin 256 L. Ed. at 465

“[The Fourth Amendment’s] origin and history clearly show that it was intended as a restraint upon the activities of sovereign authority, and was not intended to be a limitation upon other than governmental agencies[.]”

Yanaki v. Iomed, Inc.  ·  2005-07-26  ·  Tenth Circuit  ·  6 pin-cites  ·  pin 256 L. Ed. at 465

"The Fourth Amendment gives protection against unlawful searches and seizures, and as shown in the previous cases, its protection applies to governmental action."