Hester v. United States

holding that the Fourth Amendment accords “special protection ... to the people in their ‘persons, houses, papers and effects.’ ” (quoting U.S. Const. amend. IV) | holding that private land near the home and accessible to federal agents was a public place | holding that the Fourth Amendment’s 2 protection accorded “persons, houses, papers and effects” did not extend to the open 3 fields | holding that the “special protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment to the people in their ‘persons, houses, papers and effects’ is not extended to the open fields” | holding that the “special protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment to the people in their ‘persons, houses, papers and effects’ is not extended to the open fields” | holding that a trespass does not, of itself, constitute an illegal search | discussing the open fields doctrine in the context of an underlying conviction for “concealing distilled spirits” | finding in the Prohibition-era case, “[t]he defendant’s own acts, and those of his associates, disclosed the jug, the jar and the bottle” | upholding the seizure of items that were abandoned by defendants who were fleeing from officers who were pursuing defendants without a warrant | distinguishing between “open fields” and “curtilage,” the latter of which is traditionally defined as the area immediately surrounding the home, into which its intimate activities extend | establishing the "open fields" doctrine, wherein Fourth Amendment protections are diminished in open fields | establishing the "open fields" doctrine, wherein Fourth Amendment protections are diminished in open fields | upholding officers’ examination of illegal whiskey bottles dropped by defendant and a companion | noting the protection “is as old as the common law” and citing Blackstone | recognizing the “open fields” doctrine | recognizing the “open fields” doctrine | “the special protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment . . . is not extended to the open fields.” | special protection accorded by the fourth amendment to people in their “persons, houses, papers and effects” does not extend to open fields | special protection accorded by the fourth amendment to people in their "persons, houses, papers and effects" does not extend to open fields | no seizure occurred where officer retrieved and examined contents of bottle of moonshine whiskey defendant abandoned in open field on property where he lived | Fourth Amendment does not apply when revenue officer trespasses on private field and discovers broken whiskey bottle on ground belonging to defendant | special protection accorded by Fourth Amendment to people in their persons, houses, papers, and effects does not extend to open fields | special protection accorded by Fourth Amendment to people in their persons, houses, papers, and effects does not extend to open fields | agents retrieved contraband abandoned by defendants while being pursued without proper warrant — contraband deemed abandoned and not subject to exclusionary rule | where the defendant, being pursued by revenue officers, in an open field, dropped the jug of whiskey which he was “toting” | “there was no seizure in the sense of the law when the officers examined the [incriminating evidence] after it had been abandoned” | police investigating a tip of illegal activity chased suspects who ran when police arrived; suppression of evidence tossed in open field not required | moonshine whiskey seized from yard where fleeing suspect dropped it did not violate Fourth Amendment protection | “[T]he special protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment to the people in their ‘persons, houses, papers and effects,’ is not extended to the open fields.” | police investigating a tip of illegal activity chased suspects who ran when police arrived; suppression of evidence tossed in open field not required | “[T]he special protection accorded by the Fourth Amendment . . . is not extended to the open fields.” | “[T]he special protection accorded by the Fourth Ame