Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for . Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.

 

Warrant required to obtain phone tracking data, court rules

Published time: June 12, 2014 02:44
Mario Tama / Getty Images / AFP

Mario Tama / Getty Images / AFP

US law enforcement officials must convince a judge to provide a search warrant before they obtain phone location data from a cell tower, according to an appeals court ruling poised to force the police to narrow down their evidence-gathering methods.

The three-judge panel of the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Americans do have the right to expect that their private movements will not be tracked, and the mere action of driving past a cell tower with their phone in hand is not enough cause for police to violate that privacy. The judges ruled Wednesday that police who do obtain the records without a judge's permission are violating a suspect's rights under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure.

While committing a crime is certainly not within a legitimate expectation of privacy, if the cell site location data could place him near those scenes, if could place him near any other scene,” the judges wrote, as quoted by the Associated Press. “There is a reasonable privacy interest in being near the home of a lover, or a dispensary of medication, or a place of worship, or a house of ill repute.”

Police will still be able to obtain the records they need, although they will have to adhere to a higher burden of proof to earn a warrant that is currently required by a court order.

The court's opinion is a resounding defense of the Fourth Amendment's continuing vitality in the digital age,” American Civil Liberties Union attorney Nathan Freed Wessler said in a statement after the decision. “The court soundly repudiates the government's argument that by merely using a cell phone, people somehow surrender their privacy rights.”

The three-judge panel ruled in the case of Quartavious Davis, a Miami resident who was sentenced to 162 years in prison for his involvement in a series of violent armed robberies.

Davis was convicted in part because cell phone tracking data placed him near the location of six of the robberies for which he was convicted, a point of contention for his lawyers who claimed police had no right to pull Davis' location records with a mere court order. A lower court judge ruled in the police's favor, deciding that they were allowed to do so under a “good faith” exception that was later deemed unconstitutional.

The ruling cited a 2012 US Supreme Court decision in which justices ruled that attaching a global positioning system device to a suspect's car constituted a Fourth Amendment search. The ruling was roundly criticized at the time for its failure to address how police obtain location data, particularly whether they need a warrant.

The decision essentially determined that police were wrong to plant a device on a suspect's vehicle, although ACLU attorneys argued that the Supreme Court should have gone further and noted that the average cell phone pings a nearby tower every eight seconds. For police to take advantage of that technology without any oversight is far more intrusive than planting a device on a car, according to the ACLU's Catherine Crump.

After all, a cell phone is something you carry with you wherever you go,” she told NPR. “And we don't think the government should be accessing that type of information without a really good reason, which they can demonstrate by getting a warrant from a judge.”

Comments (3)

 

DS 12.06.2014 16:49

So now all someone has to do is prove something is collected. Good luck ewith that since NSA computers are stuck on destroying information

 

Wilson Boozer 12.06.2014 03:45

Here's another opportunity for Scalia and Clarence (Uncle) Thomas to undermine the Bill of Rights in a broad assault on the Fourth Amendment!

 

Norhalis Piperdy 12.06.2014 03:26

US law enforcement??? Very vuage!
Does it include NSA, CIA and every other US intelligence angencies??? Hehe

Add comment

Authorization required for adding comments

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

OK

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

X

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

Follow us

Follow us