AK: Police aerial flyover with telephoto lens of rural property violates state right of privacy

Under the Alaska Constitution, an aerial flyover with a telephoto lens of rural property in a “sparsely populated area” in the woods north of Fairbanks produced evidence of a grow operation. In a long (and sensitive opinion), the Alaska Supreme Court decides that the warrantless use of telephoto lenses to spy on Alaskans violates the state constitution, based on its own prior interpretations of the state right of privacy. It rejects cases from other states, and it notes that it could apply to drones. State v. McKelvey, 2024 Alas. LEXIS 28 (March 8, 2024):

Do the police have to get a warrant before taking pictures of your yard with a zoom lens while flying in an airplane? The State argues that because small airplane travel is so common in Alaska, and because any passenger might peer into your yard and snap a picture of you, law enforcement officials may do the same. We disagree. The Alaska Constitution protects the right to be free of unreasonable searches. The fact that a random person might catch a glimpse of your yard while flying from one place to another does not make it reasonable for law enforcement officials to take to the skies and train high-powered optics on the private space right outside your home without a warrant. Unregulated aerial surveillance of the home with high-powered optics is the kind of police practice that is “inconsistent with the aims of a free and open society.” The Alaska Constitution does not allow it.

[Note: I started to include portions of the opinion, but there’s just too much to cut and paste. Read it yourself.]

Update:

ABAJ: Warrant required for overhead zoom-lens search that could reveal ‘intimate’ and ‘unflattering’ details, top state court says by Debra Cassens Weiss

This entry was posted in Curtilage, Plain view, feel, smell, Surveillance technology. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.