美國聯邦憲法增修條文第4條 搜索令狀原則的新發展：以Jones, Jardines & Grady案為例

New Development Regarding Search Warrants under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution —Jones, Jardines & Grady

美國聯邦最高法院在判斷什麼樣的政府行為會構成美國聯邦憲法增修條文第4條規定的搜索而需適用法院的令狀原則要求，在西元2012年Scalia大法官主筆的United States v. Jones案中，產生一個新的轉折發展：主張以隱私權為基礎的合理隱私期待標準與以財產權為基礎的物理侵入原則，兩者間並非「取代」，而係「併存」關係。此一「雙軌理論」主張，繼續在西元2013年之Florida v. Jardines案與西元2015年之Grady v. North Carolina案獲得援用，應值重視。此外，新興科技對於政府搜索行為認定的影響，美國法院出現了物理侵入原則至合理隱私期待標準，再到兩標準併立的轉變因應過程，亦值我國搜索法制發展援引借鏡。 In regards to the requirement of a search warrant under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a new rule was declared by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Jones in 2012, authored by Jus-tice Scalia. Jones did not adopt the prior position that the reasonable expectation of privacy test should replace the physical trespass doctrine. In Jones, the Court ruled that both tests—a reasonable expectation of privacy (a principle based on the right to privacy), and physical invasion of private property (a principle based on the protection of private prop-erty)—should apply in the examination of the requirement of a search warrant. This two-tier theory in Jones was restated by the Court in 2013 in Florida v. Jardines and reaffirmed in 2015 in Grady v. North Carolina. This article introduces the evolvement of Fourth Amendment tests in the U.S. and the above most recent standard the Court has adopted in reviewing searches by the government. The alteration of privacy tests may have reflected the Court’s positions in resolving dif-ferent types of disputes arising from the government’s use of innovative technologies in conducting searches. The above development of the U.S. Fourth Amendment tests may provide guidance on approaches to de-velop our own laws relating to searches conducted by the government.

In regards to the requirement of a search warrant under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a new rule was declared by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Jones in 2012, authored by Jus-tice Scalia. Jones did not adopt the prior position that the reasonable expectation of privacy test should replace the physical trespass doctrine. In Jones, the Court ruled that both tests—a reasonable expectation of privacy (a principle based on the right to privacy), and physical invasion of private property (a principle based on the protection of private prop-erty)—should apply in the examination of the requirement of a search warrant. This two-tier theory in Jones was restated by the Court in 2013 in Florida v. Jardines and reaffirmed in 2015 in Grady v. North Carolina. This article introduces the evolvement of Fourth Amendment tests in the U.S. and the above most recent standard the Court has adopted in reviewing searches by the government. The alteration of privacy tests may have reflected the Court’s positions in resolving dif-ferent types of disputes arising from the government’s use of innovative technologies in conducting searches. The above development of the U.S. Fourth Amendment tests may provide guidance on approaches to de-velop our own laws relating to searches conducted by the government.