Supreme Court Ban on Warrantless GPS Tracking Has Wider Implications

2012 High Court

Supreme Court Bans GPS By TexasBrady
 

For those of you who are currently in currently in Law Enforcement, the Supreme Court now says you had better develop your probable cause, because the High Court said in a unanimous decision that you MUST secure a search warrant before you can attach any GPS tracking device, and yes it includes the sneaky way of tossing a cell phone underneath the seat of your target vehicle. Being a Police Officer (Ret), I could see this coming.

What does this mean for your local Police, not much really, other than they will really have to develop some air tight probable cause, better known in police jargon as PC.  Building PC can some time get a little complicated, especially if your case is weak in the first place.  The judge wants you to sell him that you have a solid case and convince him that you are not just going on a fishing expedition.
If the judge signs it, turn around and run before he changes his mind.  Once signed the Officer(s) have a limited time to execute the warrant, In Texas you have three days to execute the search warrant, excluding the day of issuance and the day of execution.

How do the police determine if he needs a search warrant? Basically you need a warrant to enter any home, property, and vehicle(s), out buildings on the property so on and so forth. You may also need to obtain a warrant to secure bodily fluids, hair fingerprints. If your warrant is evidentiary in nature, the warrant must be signed by a court of record.

Art. 18.01. [304] SEARCH WARRANT.  (a) A "search warrant" is
a written order, issued by a magistrate and directed to a peace
officer, commanding him to search for any property or thing and to
seize the same and bring it before such magistrate or commanding him
to search for and photograph a child and to deliver to the
magistrate any of the film exposed pursuant to the order.
 (b)  No search warrant shall issue for any purpose in this
state unless sufficient facts are first presented to satisfy the
issuing magistrate that probable cause does in fact exist for its
issuance.  A sworn affidavit setting forth substantial facts
establishing probable cause shall be filed in every instance in
which a search warrant is requested.  The affidavit is public
information if executed, and the magistrate's clerk shall make a
copy of the affidavit available for public inspection in the
clerk's office during normal business hours.
 (c)  A search warrant may not be issued pursuant to
Subdivision (10) of Article 18.02 of this code unless the sworn
affidavit required by Subsection (b) of this article sets forth
sufficient facts to establish probable cause:  (1) that a specific
offense has been committed, (2) that the specifically described
property or items that are to be searched for or seized constitute
evidence of that offense or evidence that a particular person
committed that offense, and (3) that the property or items
constituting evidence to be searched for or seized are located at or
on the particular person, place, or thing to be searched.  Except as
provided by Subsections (d) and (i) of this article, only a judge of
a municipal court of record or county court who is an attorney
licensed by the State of Texas, statutory county court, district
court, the Court of Criminal Appeals, or the Supreme Court may issue
warrants pursuant to Subdivision (10), Article 18.02 of this code.
(See complete details on Texas CCP)

To be safe, if you are NOT SURE…………..”Get a Warrant” it is better to be safe than sorry and you certainly do not want to have your evidence tossed out at trial and lose your case……….DO YOU!
Some judges are very touchy and they really want detailed PC.  Other Judges may be a little more forgiving. The bottom line is you have to sell the judge that you have a case
To be safe, if you are NOT SURE…………..”Get a Warrant” it is better to be safe than sorry and you certainly do not want to have your evidence tossed out at trial and lose your case……….DO YOU!
Some judges are very touchy and they really want detailed PC.  Other Judges may be a little more forgiving. The bottom line is you have to sell the judge that you have a case

A U.S. Supreme Court decision released on Jan. 23 will have a significant impact on how law enforcement officers can use GPS technology to track criminal suspects in a wide variety of cases.
In this case, the use of a GPS location device attached to the bottom of a car driven by a suspect allegedly to conduct drug deals was considered a violation of the suspect’s Fourth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution. But in some ways the case raises more questions than it answers.

The case in question was the conviction of Antoine Jones for drug trafficking. The police asked for and received a warrant for the GPS tracking in the District of Columbia good for 10 days. However, the police didn’t actually manage to affix the device to the vehicle being used by Jones until 11 days later, in a parking lot in Maryland. The trial court accepted the GPS evidence, which helped locate the place where Jones stored his drugs, but that was overturned on appeal, as was the conviction.

The Supreme Court, in deciding the case, took the most narrow possible view. The reasoning behind the decision was that the act of attaching the GPS device after the warrant expired constituted an illegal search. Essentially, the court reasoned that by touching Jones’ car, the police effectively seized his effects without a warrant, which is one of the things that the Fourth Amendment says you can’t do.
The Fourth Amendment says “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” All such seizures require a properly sworn warrant issued by a court, the amendment says. Source:

It my opinion, feel that obtaining a search warrant is sound police work.  I can’t see why it would hinder you. In securing the search warrant you are building your case and covering all bases and you are not providing the defense any reason to challenge you on how the evidence was secured. Yes it is extra work, but if you have a good case from the beginning, you have just enhanced your case by tightening the screws and making it more difficult for the defense or the court to challenge your evidence. I just love giving the defense hell,  I get a kick out of it.
Have a great weekend…………I will.