The New York Times reported that the Supreme Court decided on Monday that a Global Positioning Device (GPS) tracking system placed on a suspect's car by police violated his Fourth Amendment privacy rights. The Court ruled unanimously on this decision, with the majority agreeing with the rationale that the issue was the placement of the GPS device on private property.
The case, United States v. Jones, involved a Washington nightclub owner who was suspected of participating in a cocaine-selling operation. Antoine Jones's movements were tracked for a month when police placed the GPS device on his Jeep Grand Cherokee without obtaining a valid warrant. Jones had been sentenced to life in prison based on the evidence gathered by police, including the information gathered by the GPS.
Justice Scalia, who wrote the opinion, stated "The government physically occupied private property for the purpose of obtaining information. We have no doubt that such a physical intrusion would have been considered a 'search' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when it was adopted."
Justice Alito, who concurred with the majority on the ruling, differed on the rationale: "We need not identify with precision the point at which the tracking of this vehicle became a search, for the line was surely cross before the 4-week mark. Other cases may present more difficult questions."
The lawyer for the defendant in this case said the ruling was a "signal event in Fourth Amendment history," according to the article.
Glickman Turley's experienced attorneys represent individuals on a wide range of immigration matters, as well as other legal issues. Please contact our attorneys if you wish to discuss representation on immigration matters, real estate purchase and sales, condominium associations, criminal defense, non-profit law, civil litigation, business litigation, business law, probate matters including wills, powers of attorney, health care proxy, same-sex parent adoptions, guardianships, animal law, or LGBT legal matters.
