Reference no: EM133036248

1. Discuss whether the term "open fields" includes any place that is public or private outside the curtilage, including forests, lakes, woods, city streets, and stadiums.

The open field doctrine is a legal term that refers to the idea that everything that is easily visible to the naked eye, even if it is on private property, is subject to search because it is not hidden. Consent is not required to inspect the area under this approach for a law enforcement official to observe and report things that are clearly visible and include observations made. In other words, the open fields doctrine is a doctrine that holds that a warrant is not needed when searching for open places such as areas such as pastures, wooded areas, open water, and vacant lots that do not need to comply with the requirements and probable cause. Furthermore, open fields must be neither open nor fields, but just portions of land beyond the curtilage, according to the doctrine. As a result, densely fenced dense woodlands could be considered open fields.

2. The open-fields doctrine is the legal doctrine that a "warrantless search of the area outside a property owner's curtilage" does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Curtilage is the area immediately surrounding a dewlling and it also counts as part of the home for legal purposes, which can include searches and self-defense laws. Curtilage includes the area immediately surrounding a dwelling, and it counts as part of the home for many legal purposes, including searches and many self-defense laws. The term includes the ouside of stadiums and home on city streets. I believe public places are different when it comes to this docterine, as there is no true "owner", where as private places have more of a basis for privavy, as there needs to be caution when approaching someone's Fourth Amendment rights for their property and privacy.

3. The open field doctrine is a warrantless search of the area outside a property owner's curtilage which does not violate the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution. Expectation of privacy in an open field is not considered as reasonable or legitimate, even if there are fences or no trespassing signs around the field. Open fields may include any unoccupied or undeveloped area outside the curtilage. While open fields are not protected by the fourth amendment, the curtliage; or outdoor area immediately surrounding the home, may be protected. Courts have treated this area as an extension of the house and as such subject to all privacy protections afforded a person's home unlike a person's open fields under the fourth amendment. In Addition, In Hester v United States, the court held that the fourth amendment did not protect open field and that therefore, police searches in such areas as pastures, wooded areas, open water and vacant lots need not comply with the requirements of warrants and probable cause.

4. open fields is considered all the space that is not contained within the curtilage and need be neither open nor fields. The open fields doctorine allows law enforcement officers to search for and seize evidence in open fields without a warrant, probable cause, or any other legal justification.Even if officers trespass while searching the open fields, the trespass does not render the evidence inadmissable. Oliver v. United States,466 U.S. 170 (1984). Curtilage is defined as the grounds and buildings immediatley surrounding a dwelling that are used for domestic purposes in connection with the dwelling. Areas within the curtilage of a home are protected against unreasomable searches and seizures by the 4th amendment.

5. The "open field' doctrine clearly states any area that warrantless search of the area outside a property owner's curtilage does not violate the Fourth Amendment. A curtilage is an area or land that is a part of a house and is claimed as so for legal purposes. When it comes to open fields such as forests, lakes, woods, city streets and stadiums, they are all fair to search without a warrant as long as they are not owned property. For example, an area behind a fence of a house can not be searched without a warrant or probable cause that a crime is being committed. However, a lake or a forest behind a house is fair game to search because it is not part of the property owned by the homeowner.