United States v. Vankesteren

OPINION

GREGORY, Circuit Judge:

■ The appellant in this case, Steve Vank-esteren, invites us to consider the application of the Fourth Amendment to a product of' modern surveillance technology: namely, a hidden, fixed-range, motion-activated video camera placed in the appellant’s open fields. We find that the protective wall of the Fourth Amendment does not shield the appellant from the Commonwealth’s use of such a camera, and we therefore affirm the decision of the district court.

I

Appellant Vankesteren is a farmer on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. In December 2006, the .Virginia Department of…