The Alaska Supreme Court says that Alaska State Troopers can’t use high-powered surveillance equipment to conduct surveillance of property without cause.
The case involved John William McKelvey, who in 2012 had a marijuana growing operation north of Fairbanks. Based on a tip, Troopers flew over the property and took photos with a telephoto lens, which captured images of some unknown plants growing. With that, they got a search warrant and were able to validate their suspicions.
The court ruled on Friday that the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Alaska Constitution have strong guarantees to the right of privacy and freedom from unreasonable searches.
“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 or 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,” the court wrote.
From now on, law enforcement aerial surveillance in Alaska must get a warrant prior to taking pictures of private property from the sky. The ruling is embedded here:
Their argument is extremely thin. A person in an airplane looking down at a persons property is benign, won’t result in a search warrant.
Drones are being used in several states to surveil properties for a multitude of reasons. I wonder if anyone has challenged their use.
A person looking down at a person’s property is not always “benign.” There have been people busted for scoping out others property by flying over and then going back and stealing stuff. Airplanes and drones are abused by evil.
Ginny, your argument is specious. Look that word up. You can not give us one case where anyone was “busted for scoping out others property by flying over and then going back and stealing stuff.” They would be busted only for the theft; not the fly-over.
Are you copying Rollo Tomasi’s word usage today? New word for you? Pretty cool huh? I can think of one thug right off the bat that used to do flyovers. Not naming names though. People that have been in the Anchorage-Mat Su Valley bowl going back a few years and know people who own places out in areas where you get to by boat, plane or snowmachine could probably name a thug or two also.
Ginny, I challenge you to cite an instance where someone was “busted for scoping out other’s property by flying over and then going back.” The fact is, anyone “busted” for such a thing would be getting busted for the stealing portion of the activity–not the flying over. By your logic we would need to shut down all roads over which thieves travel.
Nathan, you are correct about the fly over. It is a shame that people feel okay to use any methods available to them to plot out how they are going to steal someone else’s property. The thug that I know specifically flew a plane to do drug running and scope out properties to steal from. I can tell you, though, that if someone is buzzing my place, I am definitely going to find out whose plane it is.
Just appeal it. Overturned.
I have become incensed when finding that privately-owned and operated drones (with camera on board!) are buzzing around my property. And while I greatly appreciate the essential work of local police departments, I do not want their drones snooping overhead either. Get a search warrant, gendarmeries, or fuggitaboutit!
Send up some helium balloons with 200 feet of fine fishing line dangling from them — those drones will come down in short order.
File a lawsuit against GoogleEarth for photographing your property without a warrant. Next, file lawsuits against the banks, grocery stores, Home Depot, Costco, the gas stations, government buildings, all of them and more, for photographing you in or near their premises. Don’t forget, the police all wear body cameras; you need to sue them as well. Or, anyone that catches your image on their cel-camera. Sue them all. Read the 1st Amendment and good luck.
Wayne, just because we as a society have allowed those progressive infringements on our privacy, and on our rights, does not make every one of those intrusions justified.
But apparently you feel just fine riding down slippery slopes.
You have a probable point there, Coogan. the Nazis and their lovers are here irready. The horses rear is out of the barn.
Google Earth isn’t the government. Private businesses have every right to record what goes on inside their premises; if you don’t like it don’t patronize that business. And as far as police body cameras go, those activities are occurring in public where you don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
So I can dispose of any drone over my property.
Looks like we win one as our privacy has one more positive thing going for it.
That’s not what it says. You don’t own the air space.
Mark, I remember years ago, a discussion on FB in a local group about drones flying over a property. From what I understand, there is no law against it. It is disgusting that people can be totally disrespectful and do that crap. If some f’kr is using a drone to look into my house windows, there will be problems for them. It would be a shame if my home equipment, unbeknownst to me, emits horrible frequencies that cause problems for anything hanging out over my place.
Unfortunately the FAA has chosen to regulate drones as aircraft which makes it a violation of federal law to interfere with their operation in any way. Before that it was a matter of State law and different States had different approaches to the matter.
I don’t have much faith in anything to do with OUR legal system. It’s broken the troopers are certainly a disappointment. They hire them by shoe size.
Our local police are pretty good for what they have to work with and I support them. However, the state troopers, especially the fish and game ones, are a complete joke. They spend all their time looking for minor infractions and ignore everything that really matters. They are haughty, conceited, arrogant, and abuse their authority as a matter of course and are fired if they refuse to do so.
IRS has been known to do this looking for assets to seize
So has repo men. Legally.
Should also apply to Muni property assessors and raising property values. No Trespassing signs on the perimeter of your property keeps an assessor from stepping on it to take pictures but not from flying a drone to take pictures. With the recent courts ruling that property assessors should also be included.
We need to remember, When?? was it we voted to allowed private citizens to grow Pot. was this BEFORE or AFTER pot became legal.. If it was BEFORE, “he was out of line”; if it was after, he had all his rights and I agree with that. It all depends on which side of the Law and when the law was passed to be on the legal side.
The Alaska State Troopers’ argument is specious to begin with. Since the last 80s, the Troopers and even the Alaska Army National Guard have made surveillance flights in the Mat-Su valley and elsewhere to search for marijuana grows. The head of aviation for the petro company I worked for for 15 years also worked for the guard and bragged about how they did this during their one weekend a month and two weeks a year. I don’t live in the Valley and I’m not a pot-head, but this still always struck me as invasive without a warrant.
“……..Since the last 80s, the Troopers and even the Alaska Army National Guard have made surveillance flights in the Mat-Su valley and elsewhere to search for marijuana grows……..”
……..Using thermal sensors seeking the heat of multiple 1000 watt lights, and universally after “tips” from MEA on high electricity use. Was that all with warrants? Dunno………
Did it in Cali for decades.
“……..Based on a tip, Troopers flew over the property and took photos with a telephoto lens, which captured images of some unknown plants growing………”
“Based on a tip”. So, in short, the courts want to rule on these “tips” before issuing the warrants. This means they want to know who the tipster is in order to rule on whether or not the “search” is “reasonable”. Finally, the DA will refuse to identify these tipsters during grand jury presentations.
Been there. Done that.
This is a game, and everybody playing (except the grand and petit juries, there under legal duress) is corrupt; the criminal, the tipster (another criminal), the police, the lawyers on both sides, and the judge.
Want out? During jury selection, simply tell them that you know that they’re all corrupt, and they will promptly excuse you with no more than dirty looks and perhaps an empty threat. They want sheep, not citizens.
Why does this not feel like a win for the average person, but once again cover for the criminal elements in Alaska?
That is the unfortunate price of living in a free society. North Korea has a very low crime rate, but I don’t think you’d want to live there.
I’ll take scary freedom over tyrannical safety any day of the week.
A “legal” search warrant under public policy is easy to get. A “lawful” warrant under public law is somewhat more difficult.
how much federal grant funds have they spent doing “this” syr up ptitiously to date and will the private home owners receive these private photos available in files going forward and a list of unigovernmint departments who requested or CC of naive but endangered Alaskans who have actively personally hostile government neighbors employed by unigovernmint departments. One in two households in Alaska are publicly “employed” except for natives. The native slots if any were filled decades ago by South Sea Islanders because they are interchangeable. Or are they? And, who for instance is asking and gives a good gosh darn? Wasn’t the Rhondy fun this year? Beaming warmly.
Comments are closed.