3.2.3

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 3.2.3 Using Visual Aids or Viewing from Lawful Vantage Point

It is not a search to use visual aids, including flashlights, United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S. 294 (1987); State v. Cobb, 115 Ariz. 484, 566 P.2d 285 (1977) (officer’s use of flashlight did not preclude finding that object found through use of flashlight was in “plain view”); State v. Salazar, 27 Ariz. App. 620, 557 P.2d 552 (1976) (Div. 2) (flashlight shined in car); Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (1983) (same), or photo surveillance. Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) (telephoto camera from the air). If an officer is looking through a small hole or in an area next to a residence, use of enhanced visual aids may implicate the Fourth Amendment. See Dow, supra. See also Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998) (not answering question whether officer’s act of looking through gap in window’s blinds was a “search”; some justices believed it was not); United States v. Hammett, 236 F.3d 1054, 1061 (9th Cir. 2001) (officer lawfully present at the side of Hammett’s home lawfully saw marijuana plants through the crack in the wall from a distance of approximately five to six feet without making any contortions); United States v. Barajas-Avalos, 377 F.3d 1040, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004)...