In the case of California v. Ciraolo in 1985, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that police officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment when they conducted a warrantless aerial observation of Dante Ciraolo's backyard from an altitude of 1,000 feet. The authorities had received a tip that marijuana was being grown on his property but could not see it from ground level due to a high fence surrounding his yard. They then used an airplane to confirm their suspicions before obtaining a search warrant based on what they saw during their flyover and subsequently arrested him for cultivation of marijuana. In its decision, the court held that while individuals have reasonable expectations of privacy preventing government intrusion into certain areas like homes without warrants, such expectation is not applicable if observations are made from public navigable airspace in compliance with FAA regulations.

In the dissenting opinion for California v. Ciraolo, Justice Powell argued that aerial surveillance of a person's property without a warrant constitutes an invasion of privacy and violates the Fourth Amendment. He contended that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their own homes and surrounding areas, including from overhead observation. The majority’s decision to allow such surveillance would significantly alter the balance between citizens' rights to privacy and law enforcement needs. Furthermore, he expressed concern about technological advancements potentially leading to more intrusive forms of surveillance without proper legal safeguards in place.