The actual decision is readable here. Personally I side with the dissent. http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/web/newopinions.nsf/f606ac175e010d64882566eb00658118/b686f731840272eb882567e7005de14a?OpenDocument Forwarded-by: Jim Warren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Johnny King) WESTERN FEDERAL APPEALS COURT RULES POLICE MAY CONDUCT THERMAL IMAGING SURVEILLANCE ON PRIVATE HOMES WITHOUT WARRANT Court Reverses: No Warrant Needed for Thermal Imaging The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed last week (9/10) by deciding that police need not obtain a warrant before turning thermal imaging technology on private homes. The new ruling delighted law enforcement, which uses the technology to look for indoor marijuana-grow operations or drug labs by detecting excess heat coming from within a residence. The original ruling, in August, 1998, said that the technology was intrusive enough to necessitate a warrant. Even as the government's motion for re-hearing was pending, however, one of the three panel judges retired, and the new judge, Melvin Brunetti, joined Judge Michael Hawkins, the lone dissenter in the first opinion, to overturn. Judge John Noonan, dissenting to the new ruling, likened the use of thermal imaging to a high-powered telescope looking into a home, an activity which would require a warrant. But Judge Michael Hawkins, who wrote the new majority opinion said that the technology "intrude(s) into nothing." Military analyst Joseph Miranda, however, told The Week Online that the technology is more invasive than the majority opinion lets on. "Thermal imaging technology involves infrared detectors which basically allow people to see through walls. It can determine changes in heat levels within a house. While the police might be using this technology to find marijuana grow lights, they can also determine which rooms have people in them and even what you are doing in your bedroom. In fact, the technology is getting to the stage that with the help of computer-enhancement, authorities could use the technology to get a pretty accurate picture of very personal activities." From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blaine-Laura Katz) Subject: Court Reverses: No Warrant Needed for Thermal Imaging Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 04:40:29 -0400 ======================================================== The Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeal covers most of the Western U.S. Cases are usually decided by a 3 judge panel. The first time this case was heard, two of the three judges voted that thermal imaging surveillance was so intrusive of privacy that it required a warrant. One judge ruled that it needed no warrant. One of the judges that ruled it needad a warrant retired, and the judge who took his place voted oppositely when the case was granted a rehearing at the government's (police's) request. It seem unlikely that this ruling will stand, but it will probably be the law of the land for the next year or so, until it is overturned. The next likely step will be a rehearing before the court "en banc", when all of the 23 or so judges who sit on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal will hear and decide the case together. The next, and last step, is an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. -Johnny
