Abstract
In 1924, the United States Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not require police or other government agents to obtain a warrant prior to entering upon privately owned "open fields." This exception to the warrant requirement became commonly known as the "open fields doctrine." The development of the law in this area has taken considerable time, yet has left some questions unresolved. One unanswered question is whether the Fourth Amendment protects structures that are located within open fields.
This Comment charts the development of the open fields doctrine in the United States Supreme Court, explores how other courts have applied the open fields doctrine to structures such as barns, and suggests the proper way for courts to do so in the future. Courts should employ a two-part inquiry when determining whether the warrantless search of a structure located within an open field violates the Fourth Amendment, focusing on the steps the individual took to protect privacy and how the structure was used. This approach is most consistent with the decisions of the Supreme Court. Also, this method provides individuals with notice of how far their Fourth Amendment protections reach while accommodating the legitimate needs of law enforcement.
Recommended Citation
Rowan Themer,
A Man’s Barn is Not His Castle: Warrantless Searches of Structures Under the “Open Fields Doctrine”,
33
S. Ill. U. L.J.
139
(2008).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol33/iss1/6