Drones

What it does

A police drone is a small unmanned aircraft with a camera. EFF says drones can also carry thermal sensors, plate readers, and Wi-Fi sensors, and that they can fly lower and longer than a helicopter. A drone sent to one call is a different use from a drone that launches on every call. The sensor list is what the aircraft collects.

Privacy watchdog concerns

• Electronic Frontier Foundation. Drones and Robots. EFF says police drones can carry cameras, thermal sensors, plate readers, Wi-Fi sensors, and other tools, including tethered aircraft and drone-as-first-responder docks, and that this enables surveillance of people who are not suspects. EFF also wrote that, as of late 2022, the Clark County Sheriff in Nevada planned to buy 400 drones for first response. This page has not reviewed that purchase. The sentence is EFF’s claim, not a contract, and it is not relabeled here as an LVMPD deployment.

Constitutional issues

Unresolved question

Fourth Amendment, Nevada Constitution art. 1, § 18

Warrant practice not established for a Nevada agency

Drones: The Reno snippet is a procurement line, not a flight log. Ciraolo and Florida v. Riley are counterauthority for ordinary aerial observation and do not decide recorded drone video. The LVMPD policy titles are not a deployment. EFF’s sentence about a planned Clark County Sheriff purchase was not reviewed and is not adopted as a fact.

• California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986). Counterauthority. United States Supreme Court. Naked-eye aerial observation was not a search on those facts. It does not decide recorded drone video.
• Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989). Counterauthority. United States Supreme Court. Florida v. Riley does not decide a drone program.
• Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001). Analogical constitutional argument. United States Supreme Court. Kyllo applies, if at all, when a drone sensor reveals the interior of a home. No such Nevada flight is documented.

Statutes attached to read, not findings.

• NRS Chapter 239. Nevada public-records law is the route to ask for contracts, policies, and logs. Citing it is not a finding that a surveillance practice is unlawful.
• Nevada Constitution art. 1, § 18. State search-and-seizure provision. This page does not quote the section. No section anchor was verified. It is listed only where a search question is actually implicated.
• 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A civil remedy for a deprivation of federal rights under color of state law. It is not a warrant statute, and it does not itself make a surveillance practice unlawful.

Nevada use

City of Reno only, as one line in the October 22, 2026 Axon snippet. The staff report was not fetched. LVMPD policy titles 6.545 and 6.550 do not confirm a deployment. EFF’s drones page says the Clark County Sheriff planned a large purchase. That sentence was not reviewed and is not treated as a deployment, and it is not relabeled as LVMPD.

City of Reno, as reported, only. LVMPD drone use is not confirmed. Docking and tethers are separate cards.

See also: Tethered drones; Drone docking and drone-as-first-responder; FLIR and other thermal imaging

Policy page. LVMPD policy titles 6.545 and 6.550 are identified on this site. The PDFs are not attached. The 6.550 page is /policies/6-550-uas-investigations/. Neither title confirms a deployment. NRS 493 is cited on the policy page and is not adopted as verified here.

Next record

Drones: Fetch the Reno staff report. Keep the LVMPD policy titles unverified until the PDF is attached.

Sources

• Flock is out in Reno, but the city will still use license plate readers · The Nevada Independent · 2026-10-22

All devices. A document workflow for this page is not built. The arrest correction form is not a surveillance-document inbox. Corrections and source documents for this page follow the corrections policy. Corrections policy.