Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
10 Min Issue 1 Defense (Enclosure (“In US v. French, this court in 2002…
10 Min Issue 1 Defense
“High court stated in Dunn, measurements of distance can be used to determine curtilage but there is no definite distance test (Dunn 1140)”
In Blevins v. Bartels this court in 2005 “stated that they are cautious in over reliance on the proximity prong” (Bartels, 451).
THESIS: The outdoor kitchen was 90 ft from the home but within the several enclosures of the property
“In US v. French, this court in 2002 stated that enclosures can define a property line” French, 291 F.3d 945, 952 (2002)
The high court stated in California v. Ciraolao, 106 S.Ct. 1809, 1812 (1986), enclosures can be multiple enclosures can exist on one property
-
-
R. 10 6 ft hedges. 2 ft bushes, wooden fence
-
p 24 brick wall, slanted roof
- PROTECTION OF OBSERVATION FROM PASSERBY
THESIS: The Janssen's shielded their property from public interference with natural and artificial barriers.
RULE: “Identifying the purpose of using enclosures such as shrubs, walls, or signs used to prevent public access and public view help establish a reasonable expectation of privacy” French, 291 F.3d 945, 952 (2002) and
LF: “However anything viewed w/in the curtilage in plain sight or fro public vantage points do not violate the 4th Am” California v. Ciraolo 476 U.S. 207 (1986)
E: Ciraolo
Court held marijuana grown in Def yard was w/in curtilage since it was in the backyard = curtilage. The issue in this case was whether the courts should allow officers who were unable to view the curtilage from the ground level could fly over to view from vantage point.
No trespassing sign, enclosures protected from public access, cliff = couldn't see from the beach below
R. 10-11 McGorry looking into structure, couldn't see into backyard hedges
R 24 No railing so you don't fall, not until pokemon go was released. July 14, 2016 Mr. Janssen notices a bush missing from his southern boundary so he placed a "no trespassing sign" 9 days later the outdoor kitchen was searched.
R 23 20x20ft slanted roof, the western side bordering the neighbors lot has a solid brick wall and the other three sides have sliding glass doors with translucent curtains hanging.
CONCLUSION: The Janssen's clearly intended the outdoor kitchen to be a private area and took numerous steps to prevent public access and interference.
-
"Intimate and private activities are weighed heavily and can be proven by examining the frequency and nature of use in the area, " DUNN
"Heightened areas of privacy include areas where family activities occur such as the backyard or structures in the backyard since those areas are associated with the sanctity of the home" Blevins v. Bartel, 422 F.3d 445 (2005)
Areas used for storage of work activites or leisure are not domestic. Domestic activity are things associated with the home. Bartels.
Area to be within the curtilage there must e intimate and private activites asociated with the home. Dunn.
EXPLAINATION:
CONRAD: Court held backyard deck was w/in curtilage= family viewed the deck as an extension of their home and intimate and private activities such as the consumption of family meals took place.
DUNN- Barn not in curtilage, chemicals created unlivable environment no domestic use
-
R 24 domestic appliances oven, refrigerator, ceiling fan and electricity = Indicates Janssen's intended the space to be an extension of their kitchen home
Dunn distinguishable- because barn was unlivable, methamphetamine chemicals produced a noxious unlivable environment where there was no way domestic activity could occur in the barn
PERSUASIVE: CONRAD looked at arrangement of furniture and items on the deckSim to CONRAD R 24- Family ate several meals w/2 small kids
CONCLUSION: In this case the outdoor kitchen was livable, intended for cooking and family enjoymentAssessing whether an area was intended for domestic and intimate activities provides a means to limit unrestricted searches since the home and curtilage have an reasonably expectation of privacy.
-