Document: 468 U.S. 705 104 S.Ct. 3296 82 L.Ed.2d 530 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.James Connors KARO et al. No. 83-850. Supreme Court of the United States Argued April 25, 1984. Decided July 3, Rehearing Denied Sept. 18, See 1250, 105 51. Syllabus After a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent learned that respondents Karo, Horton, and Harley had ordered 50 gallons either from Government informant, who told ether was to be used extract cocaine clothing been imported into States, obtained court order authorizing installation monitoring beeper in one cans ether. With informant's consent, DEA agents substituted their own can containing for shipment. Thereafter, saw Karo pick up followed his house, determined by using inside house where it then monitored. The moved succession two other houses, including Horton's, before first locker commercial storage facility another such facility. Both lockers were rented jointly Horton Harley. Finally, removed second respondent Rhodes an unidentified woman transported Horton's truck, Rhodes' Harley, Steele. Using monitor, warrant search based part on information derived through use beeper. executed Steele, Roth arrested, seized. Respondents indicted various offenses relating cocaine. District granted respondents' pretrial motion suppress seized evidence grounds initial install invalid seizure tainted fruit unauthorized appealed but did not challenge invalidation warrant. Appeals affirmed, except with respect Rhodes, holding required monitor private dwellings lockers, resulting Government's prior illegal conduct, therefore properly suppressed as Roth, Karo. Held: 1. No Fourth Amendment interest or any infringed consent sufficient validate installation. And transfer beeper-laden neither nor seizure, since conveyed no wished keep interfere anyone's possessory meaningful way. Pp. 711-713. 2. residence, location opened visual surveillance, violates rights those have justifiable privacy residence. Here, if entered question without verify he would engaged unreasonable within meaning Amendment. result is same where, warrant, surreptitiously uses obtain could outside curtilage house. There reason this case deviate general rule should conducted pursuant 713-718. 3. question, however, respondents. verified inadmissible against interests invalidate critical establishing probable cause. But because locating, monitoring, (use identifying specific which located being identified only smell emanating therefrom) seen loaded traveled highways, evident there violation anyone standing complain about while truck. v. Knotts, 460 276, 103 1081, 75 55. Under circumstances, affidavit, after striking facts searched contained untainted furnish cause issuance 719-721. 710 F.2d 1433 (CA10 1983), reversed. Andrew L. Frey, Washington, D.C., petitioner. Charles Louis Roberts, El Paso, Tex., Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 In 55 (1983), we held warrantless electronic tracking device ("beeper")1 container chemicals violate when revealed surveillance. case, are called upon address questions left unresolved Knotts: (1) whether original owner constitutes buyer having knowledge presence beeper, (2) falls ambit reveals 2 * August 1980 Agent Rottinger James Richard William informant Carl Muehlenweg Graphic Photo Design Albuquerque, N.M. States. Muehlenweg's shipment all 10 painted give them uniform appearance. 3 On September 20, 1980, Muehlenweg. They At point later day, still they undetected public sidewalk near Two days later, discovered once again moved, and, at residence father. next longer transmitting father's traced 4 Because equipment sensitive enough allow learn precisely in, subpoena records company 143 Horton. confirmed indeed row 143, noses detected odor 143. October 8 entry tone alarm door jamb so able tell opened. While installing alarm, observed inside. Agents ceased relying instead alarm. However, 16 retrieved contents sounding until manager notified there. 5 self-storage three later. coming 15 alias day 15, closed-circuit video camera view 15. February 6, 1981, observed, means camera, Gene removing loading onto rear bed pickup both surveillance tracked truck parked driveway. bringing boxes items trunk automobile. see transferred pickup. 6 p.m. car driveway along highways Taos. During trip, vehicles under physical When arrived Taos Michael maintain tight fear detection. determined, Again 7, premises. point, noticed windows wide open cold windy leading suspect used. 8, applied 10, Evan laboratory 7 conspiring possess intent distribute underlying offense. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) 846. Respondent conspiracy possess. lockers. 1983). conduct Government. protectible dwelling, installed monitored its ether-can host house.2 We petition certiorari, 464 1068, 972, 79 211 (1984), raised authorize subsequent monitoring. deal each contention turn. II judgment below favor rested major conclusion violated illegality, must legality It clear actual placement one's rights. placed belonged time DEA, stretch imagination said legitimate expectation it. cans, hand, to, possession of, Muehlenweg, given invasion occurred. Thus, even substitution can. Matlock, 415 164, 94 988, 39 242 (1974); Frazier Cupp, 394 731, 89 1420, 22 684 (1969). 9 acknowledged took control "the presumably do whatever liked violating Karo's rights." F.2d, 1438. hold Instead, occurred stated: "All individuals objects rightful ownership devices attached them, law enforcement opportunity times every place taken, residences areas right free governmental intrusion unquestioned." Ibid. Not surprisingly, describe "search" "seizure," plainly neither. A occurs "when society prepared consider reasonable infringed." Jacobsen, 466 109, 113, 1652, 1656, 80 85 (1984). mere unmonitored interest. private, all. To sure, created potential privacy, never potential, opposed actual, invasions constitute searches purposes effect mean policeman walking down street carrying parabolic microphone capable picking conversations nearby homes engaging turned on. exploitation technological advances implicates Amendment, existence. 11 likewise believe constituted seizure. "seizure" property "there some interference individual's property." Although may unknown unwanted foreign object, cannot interfered most, technical trespass space occupied existence marginally relevant has violated, necessary establish constitutional violation. Compare Katz 389 347, 88 507, 19 576 (1967) (no trespass, violation), Oliver 170, 1735, 214 (1984) (trespass, violation). Of course, merely occupation space, follow regardless nature, 12 conclude Rather, impairment occasioned beeper.3 III 13 officials, seller, 5-gallon chloroform delivery Minneapolis, Minn. partial automobile enabled officers locate area cabin Shell Lake, Wis., provided basis As came us, challenged; issue. movements arrival naked eye, committed during trip cabin. record show cabin, occasion fact otherwise. 14 gainsaying Taos, N.M., turn secure affidavit supporting application recited motor vehicle departed that: "For detection, . 'beeper' locator, I positively (5-gallon ether, described earlier affidavit) now above-described premises locator (direction finder) pinpointed signal Again, Saturday (now daytime), my shows strong residence." App. 57-58. This thus presents Contrary submission think does. 17 risk belaboring obvious, places individual normally expects authorized recognize justifiable. Our cases deviated basic principle. Searches seizures home presumptively absent exigent circumstances. Welsh Wisconsin, 740, 748-749, 2091, 2097, 732 (1984); Steagald 451 204, 211-212, 101 1642, 1647-1648, 68 38 (1981); Payton New York, 445 573, 586, 100 1371, 1380, 63 639 (1980). thought useful enter actually done little doubt For employs observation tells particular article person persons whose watched. Even verifies officers' observations also establishes remains example, significant period search. 18 is, less intrusive than full-scale search, does reveal interior extremely interested knowing otherwise like authorities nothing Knotts' Knotts "voluntarily wanted look .," U.S., 281, S.Ct., 1085; here, said, indicated visually verified. accept completely constraints determine device, suspicion, article—or person, matter—is time. Indiscriminate withdrawn present far too serious threat escape entirely sort oversight.4 reject beepers requisite justification believing crime will wherever goes likely produce criminal activity. Warrantless unreasonable, though recognized few limited exceptions rule. See, e.g., Ross, 456 798, 102 2157, 72 572 (1982) (automobiles); Schneckloth Bustamonte, 412 218, 93 2041, 36 854 (1973) (consent); Warden Hayden, 387 294, 87 782 (exigent circumstances). deemed deprecation benefits exaggeration difficulties associated procurement argues traditional justifications requirement inapplicable cases, large extent argument contention, rejected above, minuscule protected interests. primary interpose "neutral detached magistrate" between citizen officer often competitive enterprise ferreting out crime." Johnson 333 14, 367, 369, 92 L.Ed. 436 (1948). Those suspected drug entitled protection nondrug offenses. Requiring salutary ensuring abused, imposing demonstrate advance desired say rule, truly circumstances exist principles. 20 If warrants view, argues, practical forced seek way signals oblige number hardly compelling requirement. worthy note that, event, particularly attractive argue impractical seemingly unpersuaded difficulty satisfying particularity contends impossible "place" searched, what sought Brief 42. However true be, possible object placed, led wish length requested. our suffice permit sum, discern deviating warrant.5 IV 23 maintaining remained sought. trial house—Horton, Roth. That information, included proved presented cause, nevertheless valid. Franks Delaware, 438 154, 172, 98 2674, 2685, 57 667 (1978). 24 requires casual examination respects consists undisputed factual assertions, secured searched. recounted months-long evidence, Albuquerque immediate vicinity residence; departure short ether; return night. 25 leaves additional itself occupants object. reveals, four residence—Steele arguably admissible them. 26 somewhat more complicated. leg journey, rest monitored; warehouse another. 27 Assuming illegally claim confident taint locating movement undetected, contributed discovery; purpose illegality. Furthermore, informed somewhere warehouse; identify located. Monitoring hence locker.6 traversing parts found locker. 28 set locker, female remove load over streets temporarily parked. departing search—and highways—it these respondents.7 29 accordingly 30 Reversed. 31 O'CONNOR, whom REHNQUIST joins, concurring judgment. 32 join Parts I, II, Court's opinion, agree substantial portions Part well. 33 container's concerns. container, unactivated unaware beeper's unobjectionable. activated track implicated. 34 unusually narrow—narrower suggested opinion. activation infringes privacy. (1983). situation defeats tracked. 35 addition, lacks power move will, moved. absence appropriate brought others Cf. Rawlings Kentucky, 448 98, 2556, 65 633 (1980); White, 401 745, 91 1122, 453 (1971); Lopez 373 427, 83 1381, 462 (1963). threshold matter home, government outside, not, itself, infringe expectations itself. supra, permitted secreted agent. something concluding closed homeowner's 37 holds crucial factor owner's lack given, homeowner. obtained, enters homeowner analysis flawed. First, test proposed seems squarely inconsistent supra. approved admission drugs woman's purse her male companion prove purse. Indeed, lacked claimed Had crime, purse, companion, objected evidence. defendant incriminating container. guest's moreover, difficult reconcile (1974), many similar decisions containers. access standards articulated surely simultaneously constitutionally ineffective, great Standing effective go hand hand. 40 most fundamentally, how depend invitee's status informant. Expectations formed objective appearances, known others. Stated way, contain belief beeper-free. inherently unreasonable. undisclosed alter reasonableness expectation. 41 would, therefore, different generally narrower determining touchstone defendant's placed. permission surrender might retain container—unless dominion control.1 42 My reasons preferring approach require elaboration. principles assessing single person's place, location, transmission system telephone line, reasonably well settled. relies principles—particularly presumption home—to analyze here. another's involves overlapping locations shared several persons, probing analysis. 43 need coextensive everything situated home. connection third-party searches. Consent "common authority relationship effects inspected." 171, 993. "Common rests mutual joint purposes. ." Id., n. 993, 7. 44 whatsoever conversation, (1980), straightforward—the unlawful conversation. third suppress, least grounds, wiretap persons.2 45 Another relatively easy arises share identical, Here other's party. Persons containers search; consents fruits Similarly, people speak face line conversation remain (1967), (1971). One simply separates owned "container." Each "container," 46 fall another's, guest access. permits effectively surrenders segment Insofar searching suffers occurs; transmitted unless 47 contents, Conceivably, attribute partly homeowner's. By giving surrendered insofar concerned, assume contrary. words, object's invaded disclosed. secret disclosing, just control. 48 inferred mechanically reference allowed possible, empower him depends prevent usually 49 stated WHITE's decision STEVENS, BRENNAN MARSHALL join, dissenting part. 51 species radio transmitter. Mounted much common mounted person. item attached—the functional equivalent saying "Now am ____." 52 wrote Term, 53 "protects kinds expectations, involving 'searches,' 'seizures.' 'search' infringed. 'seizure' (footnotes omitted). 54 surreptitious transmitter contains signalling device—on personal correctly concludes concealed understanding. find write separately Amendment's reach broader explicitly Court, understanding issues framed us parties leads me reached attachment judgment, "seizure."1 property, exclude world, Government, concomitant exclusively attaches exclusionary right; fundamental sense converted use. Surely "interference" rights; exclude, soon purchased delivered, infringed.2 "meaningful"; character profoundly infected bug germ free. 56 impact type illustrated Silverman 365 505, 81 679, 734 (1961). heating duct apartment building eavesdrop implicated Amendment: "[T]he overheard petitioners' usurping office—a integral petitioners, usurpation effected consent. pause local party walls. Inherent inevitably measurable terms ancient niceties tort real law." 511, 682 (footnote too, attaching usurped citizen's property—in tangible property. conceal it, asserting "dominion control" property—the "assert[ing] term. 120, 1660.3 58 developed straightforward plain public, "private" unprotected: "What knowingly exposes office, subject protection." 351, (1967).4 protection. 59 "One virtually unanimous agreement Robbins [v. California, 420, 2841, 69 744 (1981)] distinction 'worthy' 'unworthy' improper. [T]he central forecloses distinction. frail cottage kingdom absolutely guarantees majestic mansion, traveler carries toothbrush articles paper bag knotted scarf equal possessions official inspection sophisticated executive locked attache case." 822, 2171, (1982). 60 provides conceals view." 822-823, 2171-2172.5 61 illustrates approach. There, watched codefendant car. car's place. Used disclose property; already knew that. route view. held: "A traveling thoroughfares another." 1085.6 62 certainly Alderman 165, 176-177, 961, 968-969, 176 (1969).7 focusing obscure independent exposed take chloroform, accomplished following aid have. went thereafter alone taken areas, 64 recognizes concealment gives rise writes: "Indiscriminate oversight." Ante, 716 home.8 drives thoroughfare trunk, exposing "withdrawn view" footlocker, Chadwick, 433 1, 97 2476, 538 (1977), "knotted scarf," entitles inspection, placing suffices well.9 discover contend view; know Moreover, here employed 714. embraced conception "search." began moment matter, assume, devices. significantly compromises making item's despite protects comfort notion listener obtains device. 712. measured standpoint stake, compromised occurs. bathtub plumber back turned.10 66 From Amendment.11 67 regard perfectly sensible duty purporting improperly, affirm Appeals. engage de novo effort support certiorari briefed parties.12 inquiry made instance Accordingly, respectfully dissent. transmitter, battery operated, emits periodic picked receiver." 277, 1083. reversed shown Despite holding, obviously desirable useful, critical, below, O'CONNOR observes invited wired transmits engages, (1971), proposition she invitee bring Post, 722-724. conspirators consented can, relevance plants listening unsuspecting household family member monitors homeowner, "to search" visitor. 724. plurality 749, 1124, "revelation[s] defendant" eavesdropping takes cooperate trustworthy friend bugged O'CONNOR's easily speaking divulged anything hypothetical stripped inapposite, Rawlings' challenged (1969) (homeowner seized). much, noting discussion Katz, post, 725, "a line" eavesdropping. phone involved. insists showing suspicion rather execution. issue, us. invalidated want existed, misleading statements affidavit. appeal out, prevails resolve cause-reasonable issue disclosed otherwise, unwarranted foreclose him, discovery ensuing permission, course retains fortiori broadcast world outside. § 2515 (broader rules statute). decided (1983); id., 279, n., 1084, n.; 286, 1087 (BRENNAN, J., judgment); 288, 1088 (STEVENS, judgment). makes difference initially attached, yet Once effected, world. infringement began. follows case. Smith Maryland, 442 735, 744-746, 99 2577, 2582-2583, 220 (1979); Miller, 425 435, 442, 96 1619, 1623, 71 (1976); Dionisio, 410 764, 771, (1973). 129, 1665, (WHITE, Illinois Andreas, 463 765, 768, 3319, 3322-3323, 3324, 77 1003 426-427, 2845-2846, (1981) (plurality opinion); Arkansas Sanders, 753, 764-765, 2586, 2593, 235 2485 (1977). 17, 1660, 17. careful view: police Petschen distance throughout journey leaving highway arriving respondent, drum fact, others, obtaining clandestine laboratory. indication visible eye cabin." 285, 1087. ante, 713-714. response, 716-717, 4, position, check always guests carry electronically become ever pervasive homeowners expect infested bugs. another, occur 100-101, 2559, sheds light defined Alderman, concluded gone irrespective seized: "If make seize belonging parties—even transcript conversation—the 'effects' expressly Amendment." 968 acknowledge indicates 720, 6. assumed end continued; learning "establishes premises," 715, reason, necessarily considers protected, criteria accord accused surveillance—if 727-728. Since invaded, private. Salvucci, 83, 91-93, 2547, 2552-2553, 619 states: "The interest." Presumably entrance blindfolded plumber. disagree 720-721. revealing Without warehouse, are: "1. Whether manufacturing scheme subsequently transferred. "2. manufacture 'private' (such locker)." Pet. Cert. I. fail addresses questions. contrary, appears answered reverses

Category: 0