▁posting , ▁f encing ▁and ▁gate ▁also ▁indicated ▁that ▁" the ▁Joh ns ons ▁with d rew ▁any ▁permission ▁that ▁arg u ably ▁may ▁be ▁imp lied ▁for ▁the ▁DE A ▁agents ▁to ▁use ▁the ▁access way , ▁especially ▁at ▁ 1 ▁a . m ." ▁ ▁Alexander ▁conced ed ▁that ▁the ▁bar n ▁was ▁not ▁within ▁the ▁cur til age ▁of ▁the ▁house , ▁but ▁again ▁felt ▁that ▁was ▁out we ighed ▁by ▁the ▁visible ▁measures ▁the ▁Joh ns ons ▁had ▁taken ▁to ▁exclude ▁the ▁public ▁from ▁their ▁property . ▁This ▁was ▁not ▁just ▁an ▁issue ▁of ▁priv acy , ▁Alexander ▁noted , ▁but ▁the ▁safety ▁of ▁law ▁enfor cement . ▁Justice ▁Th ur good ▁Marshall ' s ▁diss ent ▁in ▁Oliver ▁had ▁noted ▁that ▁many ▁rural ▁land own ers ▁res orted ▁to ▁" self - help ", ▁as ▁he ▁put ▁it , ▁when ▁faced ▁with ▁tres pass ers , ▁and ▁the ▁DE A ▁agents ' ▁fur t ive ▁no ct urn al ▁visit ▁to ▁the ▁Joh ns ons ' ▁bar n ▁could ▁have ▁resulted ▁in ▁violence . ▁" We ▁conclude ▁that ▁the ▁agents ' ▁entry ▁onto ▁the ▁Joh ns ons ' ▁property ▁was ▁an ▁un reason able ▁intr usion ▁into ▁the ▁Joh ns ons ' ▁private ▁affairs ", ▁Alexander ▁wrote . ▁Since ▁the ▁remaining ▁un t aint ed ▁evidence ▁submitted ▁to ▁obtain ▁the ▁search ▁war rant ▁was ▁thus ▁ins u fficient ▁to ▁establish ▁probable ▁cause , ▁the ▁Joh ns ons ' ▁conv ict ions ▁were ▁revers ed ▁with ▁directions ▁to ▁dismiss