Do you agree with this passage? If so, explain. To determine if a search has been conducted and one fourth amendment rights have been violated is based on the physical setting. Curtilage is known as the area that is immediately surrounding and near the area of privacy. Open fields doctrine is any area that can be accessible to the public or police, so it does not immediately surround the home. The curtilage doctrine provides a higher expectation of privacy because one person can expect to have reasonable privacy without government intrusion unless they have a warrant. Whereas under the open field doctrine then you may not be entitled to the same protections under the fourth amendment. 1. While Officer Curious is out on her new jogging trail, she notices what she believes to be several marijuana plants growing in the backyard of a home owned by Brad, located 100 feet below the trail. She immediately ran back to her car, grabbed her binoculars, and used them to get a better look at the plants. Has Officer Curious just conducted a search of Brad's home? If so, explain why. If not, explain why not. Officer Curious is out jogging on a trail that would be considered accessible to the public. The marijuana plants could be seen by the naked eye in the back yard of Brad's home. Officer Curious was able to see the plants located 100 feet below the trail. Although she used the binoculars to get a better look at the plants it would not have violated Brad's fourth amendment rights because she did not go on the property. "Where the device merely enhances sensory perception and facilitates surveillance that otherwise would be impossible without the enhancement, the fourth amendment is not implicated" (Bloom & Brodin, 2020). Therefore, Officer Curious did not conduct a search of Brad's home