1980), the Florida First District Court of Appeal certified to the Florida Supreme Court a question of great public interest: whether a
right of privacy exists under either the federal or the state constitution which renders Florida's Public Records Law, F.S.
All of these opinions share an acceptance that the fundamental question is whether "the
right of privacy applies to the conduct of the type prohibited." (57) They did not consider a spatial test for privacy, noting only secondarily whether the act was visible or not.
Governor Howard Dean, M.D., of Vermont marked the anniversary of Baird by naming March 22 as "Right to Privacy Day" in a proclamation which read, "Recognition of the
right of privacy has freed millions of men and women from the oppression of unwilling parenthood....
Chandrachud, who in paragraphs 123 and 124 of his judgement, stated that the
right of privacy cannot be denied, even if there is a miniscule fraction of the population, which is affected.
He explained, What is being waived here is a
right of privacy. And a
right of privacy is considered sacred.
Over the past few years, these civil suits alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment
right of privacy, have met with varied success in federal court.
If, on the other hand, officers desire to search premises, vehicles, or items of personal property that can be shared by two or more people, the determination of who may consent to the search will require an analysis of who has a fourth amendment
right of privacy in the area.(9)
Connecticut,(2) in which the Court held that a State statute prohibiting the use of contraceptives violated a married couple's constitutionally based
right of privacy. The exact contours of this right to privacy have not been clearly defined, but they certainly include "matters relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships and child rearing and education."(3)
Another constitutional attack waged against the admissibility of surreptitiously recorded conversations is the claim that monitoring and recording these conversations violates the suspects' fourth amendment
right of privacy. However, if the recorded conversations take place in government space, whether it be a prison cell, interrogation room, or back seat of a police car, the fourth amendment challenge is bound to fail unless law enforcement officers give suspects specific assurances that their conversations will be private.
