Description: New Haven, Connecticut criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with possessing controlled substances with intent to distribute and conspiracy to accomplish the same.

This case included an issue regarding the admissibility of pole-camera evidence obtained without a warrant in a criminal proceeding, which raises a novel Fourth Amendment question in this Circuit. Defendant-Appellant Kenston Harry appeals a judgment of conviction for possessing controlled substances with intent to distribute and conspiracy to accomplish the same. We conclude that, in the circumstances present here, law enforcement’s use of a stationary pole camera to
monitor the exterior of Harry’s business did not constitute a search requiring a warrant.

Outcome: Defendant's motion to suppress was denied.

Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: