>This decision is quite a departure from the general rule that anything visible from public property is outside 4th amendment protection I don't believe that t

>This decision is quite a departure from the general rule that anything visible from public property is outside 4th amendment protection I don't believe that to be true. Were Vargas in a suburban or metropolitan area the ruling may have been quite different. The order specifically mentions that being in a rural, isolated area comes with different expectations of privacy. 16 The American people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the activities 17 occurring in and around the front yard of their homes particularly where 18 the home is located in a very rural, isolated setting.