By law, the curtilage of the house or residence is the surrounding land, including the closely related buildings and structures, but excluding related "open fields", nor does it include any closely related buildings , structures or divisions containing intimate activities separate from their respective occupants with persons who occupy the population into persons other than those inhabitants of the house or residence associated with the building. This illustrates the limits on which homeowners can have reasonable expectations about privacy and where "intimate home activity" takes place. This is an important legal concept within a particular jurisdiction to understand search and seizure, real estate delivery, robbery, offense, and land-use planning.
In urban property, the location of the curtilage can be seen from the position of the fence, walls and the like; in larger properties there may be some legal debates over where the private area ends and the "open fields" begin.
Video Curtilage
Etimologi
It comes from Central English: courtesy ; French Ancient: cortillage or cortil ("court, yard, garden"); cort (court) -il (minor suffix) - age (-age).
Maps Curtilage
Curtilage in US law
General Law
In common law, derived from English law, curtilage is defined as "open space located within the common enclosure of a dwelling house." Black Law Dictionary of 1891 defines it as:
"The enclosed space of land and buildings immediately surrounds the dwelling house.In its most comprehensive and precise legal designation, it includes all the space and buildings on it that are normally enclosed within a common fence immediately surrounding the main messiah and outer buildings, and the courtyard which is adjacent to the dwelling house, but may be large enough for the livestock to become the levant and couchant in it. "
Where homes in America are generally less likely than their British counterparts to include walled fences or walls, the courts do not strictly adhere to such requirements. In practice, determining the boundaries of the short line has proven to be inappropriate and subject to controversy.
Fourth Amendment
General definition
The US Supreme Court has stated that for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment, an area surrounding the house or residence is the boundary if it stores "intimate activities associated with 'the sanctity of a man's house and the privileges of life.'"
In United States v. Dunn (1987), the Court provides guidance, saying that "a brief question must be resolved with a specific reference to four factors: the proximity of the area claimed as reflection to the home, whether the area belongs to the scope surrounding the house, the region, and the steps taken by the population to protect the area from observation by passersby. "
In Florida v. Jardines (2013), the Court held, in a 5-4 decision by Judge Antonin Scalia, that the faint line may not be used by police dogs to sniff marijuana:
We therefore regard the area as "immediately surrounded and connected to the home" - what our case refers to as "cage" - as "part of the house itself for the purpose of Fourth Amendment."... The principle has ancient and durable roots. Just as the difference between a home and an open field is "as old as common law,"... so is the identity of the house and what Blackstone calls "curtilage or homestall," because "the house protects and privileges all its branches and applications."... The area around the house is "closely related to the house, both physically and psychologically," and is the "highest privacy hope."
In Collins v. Virginia (2018), the Court ruled that motor vehicles parked inside the dim line are not eligible for motor vehicle exclusions for unqualified search.
First Factor: Distance
At Dunn, the Court said that the location of a warehouse, being 60 yards (55 m) from the house and 50 yards (46 m) outside the fence that completely surrounded the house, suggested that it was outside the curtilage of the house.
At Jardines , the Court found that the veranda right in front of the private house was part of the reflection.
Second Factor: Enclosures by Fence
At Dunn, the Court said that although the area is surrounded by a fence, the house is surrounded by a different fence and the fence is clearly intended to demonstrate a certain area of ​​adjacent land directly with homes that are easily identifiable as part of the home.
Third Factor: Nature of Use
At Dunn, the Court said that law enforcement officials have evidence that the area is not used for intimate home activities, namely that it is used to store large quantities of phenylacetic acid (used in the manufacture of illegal drugs) and it has an odor that very, very strong.
At Jardines , the Court specifically mentions the front porch as a prime example of armpits; although Scout or sales staff can knock on the front door, they should leave immediately if there is no answer.
Fourth Factor: Protection from Observation
At Dunn, the Court said the area was not protected at all from observations by those standing in the open field. Although the agent does peer into a barn which is arguably protected by the Fourth Amendment, any such observations from an open field are not protected. (This is "the doctrine of ordinary views", though not labeled as such in Dunn .)
At Jardines , the Court notes that, while police can stop someone on an open highway, they are forbidden to peek into the windows of private homes from the front porch, there is no possible cause.
History
The Fourth Amendment protects "people, houses, papers, and effects". In the modern case, the Supreme Court interpreted "a house" which means "house and bottom line". It is not clear when the Court first equated "home" with "home", though Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) seems to assume that "house" means "home".
The first use of the term "curtilage" by the Supreme Court appears in the decision of two unrelated cases of 1864. United States v. Stone (1864), involves a dispute over the upper limit of Fort Leavenworth, for "What land belongs to this military post, and the skills necessary to use and enjoy it".
In Sheet v. Selden's Lessee (1864), the Court refers to "grants from messuage or messuage with equipment will carry adjacent houses and buildings, as well as garden, garden, and brief."
Apps
The Supreme Court declared that the Fourth Amendment protects the homes and their backwardness from unreasonable searches without a warrant. However, curtilage is given less protection from home. Signs or fences do not exist "Banned Entry" with locked gates, it is considered natural for a person (including a police officer) to walk from the public area to the clear main entrance to the house using the clearest path to "knock and talk "with a resident. But on the contrary, government agencies need approval, warrant, or possibly the cause of the emergency situation to enter the home reflection line.
Many state constitutions have clauses similar to the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, and many have "castle laws" that use the term "curtilage". Although countries have the right to interpret their definitions that are different from (and subject to) the Fourth Amendment of the US, they generally interpret "houses" in the same way as the Supreme Court, including the definition of "curtilage".
In the UK registered building legislation
The concept of curtilage is relevant to city and state planning in the UK, especially with regard to registered building legislation. Considerations given to registered buildings may extend to other structures or landscaping within the main structure, if the goods are long enough, and physically attached to the main building or essential for the arrangement of the structure. Current legislation uses a cut-off date of 1947, so subsequent additions, when they may be in confinement, are not included in the listing appointment.
List building or structure does not define specific limits, and this can be a matter of interpretation and disagreement. Various factors need to be taken into account, such as how the arrangement works with the main object, land ownership, historical land use, and physical or visual boundaries, such as fences, walls and hedges.
Curtilage is often undefined until someone wants to make changes to the structure or landscape in the immediate vicinity of the listed building. Some Local Planning Authorities (such as Bournemouth Borough Council) publish temporary restrictions, to assist property owners; but often the remaining lines are undefined until then may be challenged in the planning process or in law.
See also
- California v. Ciraolo
- California v. Greenwood
- United States v. Dunn
- Messages
References
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments