Part I of this article provides an overview of basic Fourth Amendment principles. Part II analyzes the Oliver and Ciraolo cases which define and distinguish residential "curtilage," protected by the Fourth Amendment, and "open fields," which the Fourth Amendment does not protect. Part III reviews the Dow decision's discussion of whether an industrial facility, like a residence, might have constitutionally protected curtilage. Part IV focuses on the Dunn decision, which dramatizes the curtilage-open field dichotomy while at the same time blurring the line between the two. Finally, part V shows how these decisions may have invalidated the "commercial curtilage" concept without squarely discussing it, and may even permit police officers to conduct surreptitious surveillance of a home from its front lawn or back yard.
Clifford S. Fishman, Police Trespass and the Fourth Amendment: A Wall in Need of Mending, 22 J. MARSHALL L. REV. 795 (1989).