good. this is unreasonable search and seizure. The space above your house is part of your private property up to a certain elevation, this is also trespassing. And if Ohio has a 2 party consent law for recording, this is also unlawful.
I agree with you as long as the property surveilled is their curtilage and they have installed sufficient coverage to prevent view from a public roadway (fence, hedge, trees). They would then have a (diminished) expectation of privacy.
The issue are the SCOTUS decisions in California v. Ciraolo (fixed wing aircraft surveillance from 1,000 ft) and Florida v. Riley (helicopter surveillance of a greenhouse from 400 ft above private property).
Free trap shooting training, grab your shotguns fellaz!
good. this is unreasonable search and seizure. The space above your house is part of your private property up to a certain elevation, this is also trespassing. And if Ohio has a 2 party consent law for recording, this is also unlawful.
Its illegal in 2 potentially 3 aspects.
I agree with you as long as the property surveilled is their curtilage and they have installed sufficient coverage to prevent view from a public roadway (fence, hedge, trees). They would then have a (diminished) expectation of privacy.
The issue are the SCOTUS decisions in California v. Ciraolo (fixed wing aircraft surveillance from 1,000 ft) and Florida v. Riley (helicopter surveillance of a greenhouse from 400 ft above private property).