▁structures ▁might ▁extend ▁the ▁cur til age ▁protection ▁to ▁the ▁areas ▁immediately ▁surrounding ▁them . ▁The ▁courts ▁have ▁gone ▁so ▁far ▁as ▁to ▁treat ▁a ▁tent ▁as ▁a ▁home ▁for ▁Four th ▁Am end ment ▁purposes ▁in ▁the ▁past . ▁ ▁Despite ▁this ▁rather ▁broad ▁interpretation ▁of ▁cur til age , ▁the ▁courts ▁seem ▁willing ▁to ▁find ▁areas ▁to ▁be ▁outside ▁of ▁the ▁cur til age ▁if ▁they ▁are ▁in ▁any ▁way ▁separate ▁from ▁the ▁home ▁( by ▁a ▁f ence , ▁great ▁distance , ▁other ▁structures , ▁even ▁certain ▁plants ). ▁ ▁Re jections ▁of ▁doctrine ▁by ▁state ▁courts ▁ ▁Since ▁Oliver , ▁the ▁highest ▁courts ▁of ▁Mont ana , ▁New ▁York , ▁Oregon ▁and ▁Verm ont , ▁as ▁well ▁as ▁a ▁Washington ▁state ▁appe als ▁court , ▁have ▁held ▁that ▁the ▁open - fields ▁doctrine ▁does ▁not ▁apply ▁in ▁those ▁states ▁due ▁to ▁their ▁state ▁constitution s ▁grant ing ▁greater ▁prote ctions ▁to ▁citizens ▁( under ▁dual ▁so vere ig nt y ▁a ▁state ▁may ▁grant ▁its ▁citizens ▁more ▁rights ▁than ▁those ▁guaranteed ▁in ▁the ▁federal ▁constitution ). ▁Since ▁K atz ▁ground ed ▁priv acy ▁in ▁persons ▁rather ▁than ▁places , ▁they ▁argue , ▁land own ers ▁who ▁have ▁taken ▁aff irm ative ▁steps ▁to ▁exclude ▁the ▁public ▁such ▁as ▁f encing ▁or ▁posting ▁the ▁bounds ▁assert ▁a ▁priv acy ▁interest ▁sufficient ▁to ▁prev ail ▁over ▁any ▁war rant less ▁search ▁of ▁the ▁property ▁where ▁common ▁exceptions ▁such ▁as ▁hot ▁purs uit ▁and ▁plain ▁view ▁do ▁not ▁apply . ▁Some ▁of