Document A provides an overview of a precedent case, Carroll v. United States, where it was decided that in the situation that evidence could be destroyed or hidden, it is constitutional to conduct a search without a warrant. The overview described the case saying “federal agents believed Carroll was selling liquor...they saw him driving...and pulled him over…they searched his car finding liquor and arrested him.” Although this case is in fact different from DLK v. United States, it mirrors one idea, law enforcement took action without a warrant. In DLK v. United States, the federal agents suspected DLK was growing marijuana in his home. However, because there was not sufficient evidence to obtain a warrant “the imager [was a reasonable way] for law enforcement to gather information without … a search warrant” (Document E). Using thermal imaging in this case was a permitted means of collecting information and is summarized well with Justice John Paul Stevens’s statement in Document F, “[t]he officers’ conduct did not amount to a search and was perfectly
Document A provides an overview of a precedent case, Carroll v. United States, where it was decided that in the situation that evidence could be destroyed or hidden, it is constitutional to conduct a search without a warrant. The overview described the case saying “federal agents believed Carroll was selling liquor...they saw him driving...and pulled him over…they searched his car finding liquor and arrested him.” Although this case is in fact different from DLK v. United States, it mirrors one idea, law enforcement took action without a warrant. In DLK v. United States, the federal agents suspected DLK was growing marijuana in his home. However, because there was not sufficient evidence to obtain a warrant “the imager [was a reasonable way] for law enforcement to gather information without … a search warrant” (Document E). Using thermal imaging in this case was a permitted means of collecting information and is summarized well with Justice John Paul Stevens’s statement in Document F, “[t]he officers’ conduct did not amount to a search and was perfectly