Expectation of privacy

reasonable expectation of privacyinvasion of privacybelieved they could speak freelyexpectations of privacyinvasion on privacylegitimate expectation of privacylegitimately demand privacysearch
Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.wikipedia
143 Related Articles

Privacy law

privacyprivacy lawsinvasion of privacy
It is related to, but is not the same as, a right to privacy, a much broader concept which is found in many legal systems (see privacy law).
Privacy laws are considered within the context of an individual's privacy rights or within reasonable expectation of privacy.

Public space

public placepublic spacesopen space
Examples of places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are a person's residence or hotel room, and public places which have been specifically provided by businesses or the public sector in order to ensure privacy, such as public restrooms, private portions of jailhouses, or a phone booth.
In some cultures, there is no expectation of privacy in a public space, however civil inattention is a process whereby individuals are able to maintain their privacy within a crowd.

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Fourth AmendmentFourthU.S. Const. amend. IV
Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Katz's reasonable expectation of privacy thus provided the basis to rule that the government's intrusion, though electronic rather than physical, was a search covered by the Fourth Amendment, and thus necessitated a warrant.

Katz v. United States

KatzKatz v United States (1967)Katz v. U.S.
It extended Fourth Amendment protection beyond the traditional confines of citizens' homes and property, and a concurring opinion filed by Justice John Marshall Harlan II set forth what is now known as the "Katz test" that inquires whether a person in a certain circumstance has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" against intrusion by government or law enforcement.

Privacy

privatepersonal privacyprivacy rights
Invasion of privacy, a subset of expectation of privacy, is a different concept from the collecting, aggregating, and disseminating information because those three are a misuse of available data, whereas invasion is an attack on the right of individuals to keep personal secrets.

Smith v. Maryland

Smith v Maryland
In Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979), the Supreme Court held individuals have no "legitimate expectation of privacy" regarding the telephone numbers they dial because they knowingly give that information to telephone companies when they dial a number.
In the majority opinion, Justice Harry Blackmun rejected the idea that the installation and use of a pen register constitutes a violation of the "legitimate expectation of privacy" since the telephone numbers would be available to and recorded by the phone company anyway.

United States v. Warshak

Warshak
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held in 2010 that users did have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of their e-mail in United States v. Warshak, although no other court of appeals has followed suit.
This case is notable because it is the first case from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals to explicitly hold that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in the content of e-mails stored on third party servers and that the content of these emails is subject to Fourth Amendment protection.

Search and seizure

searchsearches and seizuresseizure
The expectation of privacy is crucial in distinguishing a legitimate, reasonable police search and seizure from an unreasonable one.
When an individual does not possess a "reasonable expectation of privacy" that society is willing to acknowledge in a particular piece of property, any interference by the government with regard to that property is not considered a search for Fourth Amendment purposes, and a warrant is never required.

R v Tessling

R. v. TesslingTessling
The legal case of R v Tessling the Supreme Court of Canada identified that the defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy with regards to the information policemen acquired from him.
R v Tessling [2004] 3 S.C.R. 432, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court held that the use of thermal imaging by police in the course of an investigation of a suspect's property did not constitute a violation of the accused's right to a reasonable expectation of privacy under section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Legal tests

legal testtestformulation
Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Curtilage

curtilage listedcurtilethe area immediately surrounding the home
It delineates the boundary within which a home owner can have a reasonable expectation of privacy and where "intimate home activities" take place.

Email privacy

E-mail privacymonitoroften not secure
The Courts's decision was based on consideration of two factors (i) whether Dr. Ortega had a reasonable expectation of privacy, and (ii) whether the search of Dr. Ortega's office was reasonable.

Privacy laws of the United States

right to privacyviolation of privacyinvasion of privacy
In determining whether intrusion has occurred, one of three main considerations may be involved: expectation of privacy; whether there was an intrusion, invitation, or exceedance of invitation; or deception, misrepresentation, or fraud to gain admission.

DNA profiling

DNA evidenceDNA fingerprintinggenetic fingerprinting
In the United States, it has been accepted, courts often ruling that there is no expectation of privacy, citing California v. Greenwood (1988), in which the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home.

Secrecy of correspondence

privacy of correspondencecorrespondencesecrecy of the post and telephone
By Supreme Court precedent, rights derived from the Fourth Amendment are limited by the legal test of a "reasonable expectation of privacy".

Right to privacy

invasion of privacyprivacy rightsright of privacy
It is related to, but is not the same as, a right to privacy, a much broader concept which is found in many legal systems (see privacy law).

Public toilet

restroomsrestroompublic toilets
Examples of places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are a person's residence or hotel room, and public places which have been specifically provided by businesses or the public sector in order to ensure privacy, such as public restrooms, private portions of jailhouses, or a phone booth.

Prison

jailgaolpenitentiary
Examples of places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are a person's residence or hotel room, and public places which have been specifically provided by businesses or the public sector in order to ensure privacy, such as public restrooms, private portions of jailhouses, or a phone booth.

Telephone booth

phone boothtelephone boxtelephone kiosk
Examples of places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are a person's residence or hotel room, and public places which have been specifically provided by businesses or the public sector in order to ensure privacy, such as public restrooms, private portions of jailhouses, or a phone booth.

Waste

garbagerefuserubbish
There are no privacy rights in garbage left for collection in a public place.

Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Sixth AmendmentSixthU.S. Const. amend. VI
Other examples include: pen registers that record the numbers dialed from particular telephones; conversations with others, though there could be a Sixth Amendment violation if the police send an individual to question a defendant who has already been formally charged; a person's physical characteristics, such as voice and handwriting; what is observed pursuant to aerial surveillance that is conducted in public navigable airspace not using equipment that unreasonably enhances the surveying government official's vision; anything in open fields (e.g., a barn); smells that can be detected by the use of a drug-sniffing dog during a routine traffic stop, even if the government official did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to suspect that drugs were present in the defendant's vehicle; and paint scrapings on the outside of a vehicle.

Open-fields doctrine

open fields doctrine "open fields beyondopen fields
Other examples include: pen registers that record the numbers dialed from particular telephones; conversations with others, though there could be a Sixth Amendment violation if the police send an individual to question a defendant who has already been formally charged; a person's physical characteristics, such as voice and handwriting; what is observed pursuant to aerial surveillance that is conducted in public navigable airspace not using equipment that unreasonably enhances the surveying government official's vision; anything in open fields (e.g., a barn); smells that can be detected by the use of a drug-sniffing dog during a routine traffic stop, even if the government official did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to suspect that drugs were present in the defendant's vehicle; and paint scrapings on the outside of a vehicle.
The relevant criteria are "first that a person have exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy and, second, that the expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable'."

Car

automobileautomobilescars
While a person may have a subjective expectation of privacy in his/her car, it is not always an objective one, unlike a person's home.