Cja 364
Case Briefing Week 1
Law421
Facts: In 1980, DEA agents discovered that Carpenter was purchasing large quantities of chemicals and equipment in order to make controlled substances. The officers placed GPS trackers in the equipment and one of the chemical containers. Carpenters truck led officers to the respondent’s barn in question. Aerial photographs showed that the truck back up behind the barn. The ranch was completely encircled by a perimeter fence and also had barb wire fencing, a few of the barbed wire fencing and the wooden fence in front of the barn. The officers stopped and did not enter the barn. They looked inside the barn and also came back the next day and looked inside with a flashlight but did not enter the barn. The officers requested a warrant and once granted they executed it. The officers arrested Respondent and seized chemicals, equipment and some drugs that was located inside the house. Respondent and Carpenter were convicted of conspiracy to manufacture a controlled substances and related offenses.
Law 421 - Issues to decide: Whether or not the barn was within the residence’s curtilage and therefore would fall within the Fourth Amendment protection.
Cja364 - Decision of the lower court: The District Court denied the motion to suppress all evidence that was collected pursuant to the warrant. The court came to the conclusion that the barn was not within the residences curtilage for Fourth Amendment purposes. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the barn was within the residences cartilage and therefore within the Fourth Amendment protective ambit.
Cja 364 - Higher Court Decision: The US Supreme Court reversed the decision that the Court Appeals decided on. Court of Appeals held that the barn was within the residences cartilage and that the evidence should be suppressed.
Cja 364
Law421
Facts: In 1980, DEA agents discovered that Carpenter was purchasing large quantities of chemicals and equipment in order to make controlled substances. The officers placed GPS trackers in the equipment and one of the chemical containers. Carpenters truck led officers to the respondent’s barn in question. Aerial photographs showed that the truck back up behind the barn. The ranch was completely encircled by a perimeter fence and also had barb wire fencing, a few of the barbed wire fencing and the wooden fence in front of the barn. The officers stopped and did not enter the barn. They looked inside the barn and also came back the next day and looked inside with a flashlight but did not enter the barn. The officers requested a warrant and once granted they executed it. The officers arrested Respondent and seized chemicals, equipment and some drugs that was located inside the house. Respondent and Carpenter were convicted of conspiracy to manufacture a controlled substances and related offenses.
Law 421 - Issues to decide: Whether or not the barn was within the residence’s curtilage and therefore would fall within the Fourth Amendment protection.
Cja364 - Decision of the lower court: The District Court denied the motion to suppress all evidence that was collected pursuant to the warrant. The court came to the conclusion that the barn was not within the residences curtilage for Fourth Amendment purposes. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the barn was within the residences cartilage and therefore within the Fourth Amendment protective ambit.
Cja 364 - Higher Court Decision: The US Supreme Court reversed the decision that the Court Appeals decided on. Court of Appeals held that the barn was within the residences cartilage and that the evidence should be suppressed.
Cja 364