The issue with the Game cams might get ruled unconstitutional, but unless the Supreme Court wants to toss precedent by throwing out the Open Fields Doctrine, then I predict a partial upholding but not a complete one. We'll see. Apparently this USSC doesn't mind overturning precedent. I can see it going either way.
Its an interesting case. I always took the open fields doctrine to have more in common with a plain view search (obviously in other circumstances), not so much a free pass to enter private property and search or conduct surveillance. As an example, if driving by an open field on a public road an officer observes illegal activity and addresses it, that's one thing, but intentionally entering private property without probable cause on a fishing expedition is another. Maybe my understanding was incorrect but it has been hotly debated in various courts over the years and several have agreed.
Nope, Open Field doctrine means any LEO can go onto any property except the curtilage of a building. Several may have agreed with your opinion but the US Supreme Court hasn't, at least not yet. Why do you think GWs are allowed to go on to property and look around for illegal baiting then come back to try to catch the hunters on it? Well, up until recent years anyways. Bad example to use anymore, at least in Alabama now, but you get the gist. Behind any gate, over any fence, posted every 10 feet, it is still a legal intrusion as long as it is not a building or curtilage of one.
Boy, you're exercising my memory now, but I also recall the open field doctrine doesn't apply to fenced in yards of a home that is of a limited area.
