Final answer:
The Kyllo v. United States case examined whether using a thermal imaging device to detect high amounts of heat from a home constitutes an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled that such detailed surveillance is a search and requires a warrant, questioning surveillance limitations and privacy rights.
Step-by-step explanation:
Facts of Kyllo v. United States
The case of Kyllo v. United States revolved around the Fourth Amendment issue of whether the use of a thermal imaging device by the government to scan a home from the outside, without a search warrant, constitutes an illegal search. In this 2001 case, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of such technology, which is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, is a 'search' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and therefore requires a warrant.
The issue arose when federal agents used a thermal imaging device to detect high amounts of heat coming from Danny Kyllo's home, suspecting the heat to be from lamps used to grow marijuana. Based on this evidence, the agents obtained a warrant to search Kyllo's home, where they found marijuana growing. Kyllo was indicted on federal drug charges. The defense argued that the initial scan was conducted without a warrant and thus, constituted an illegal search.
The case highlighted questions about privacy rights and law enforcement's use of technology and led to discussions on surveillance limitations and Fourth Amendment rights.