Multiple Choice
Police used a thermal imager to scan Kyllo's home because they had information that he was growing marijuana in his home.Officers did not have a warrant and claimed the search was in plain view.The Supreme Court ruled that:
A) use of a thermal imager did not alter the fact that the officers observed the marijuana in plain view.
B) use of a thermal imager to explore details of a home that in the past would have been unknown without a physical intrusion into the home is a search and subject to Fourth Amendment requirements.
C) thermal imagers are common devices and,therefore,the search was in plain view.
D) the use of a thermal imager is always illegal.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q2: According to the Supreme Court,a police officer
Q3: The special protection accorded by the Fourth
Q4: According to the open fields doctrine,the protected
Q6: In Illinois v.Caballes,the Supreme Court ruled that:<br>A)Drivers
Q7: According to the Supreme Court in Smith
Q8: The twopronged test of privacy to determine
Q9: The use of a roadblock to screen
Q10: In Florida v.Bostick (1991),the court had to
Q11: If it is determined that the police
Q35: In practice, searches and seizures sometimes serve