Split Panel Affirms Warrantless Use of GPS Device


Split Panel Affirms Warrantless Use of GPS Device

The warrantless use of a global positioning device on a vehicle by police does not violate a driver’s right to privacy under either the U.S. Constitution or the New York state Constitution, an upstate appeals panel decided last week.

In becoming what it said was the first state appeals court in New York to address the issue, the Appellate Division, 3rd Department, panel determined that the privacy expectations of individuals under both the federal and state constitutions are lower when they are in their automobiles than when they are in their homes.

“Because we recognize the diminished expectation of privacy in a vehicle on a public roadway … we cannot agree that the NY Constitution precluded the warrantless placement of the GPS tracking device on defendant’s vehicle or retrieval of its data in connection with this ongoing police investigation,” a 4-1 panel held in People v. Weaver, 101104.
As to the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the panel found that nothing prevents the use of technology, such as the satellite-aided positioning devices, to “surveil that which is already public.”

“Inasmuch as constant visual surveillance by police officers of defendant’s vehicle in plain view would have revealed the same information [as the GPS device] and been just as intrusive, and no warrant would have been necessary to do so, the use of the GPS device did not infringe on any reasonable expectation of privacy and did not violate defendant’s Fourth Amendment protections,” Justice Robert S. Rose wrote for the majority.
The dissenter, Justice Leslie E. Stein, argued that global positioning system devices are considerably more intrusive than traditional surveillance methods.

“While the citizens of this state may not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place at any particular moment**, they do have a reasonable expectation that their every move will not be continuously and indefinitely monitored** by a technical device without their knowledge, except where a warrant has been issued based on probable cause,” Stein wrote.

Hmmm . . . I can’t say I disagree with the ruling but I’m not crazy about it. From what I heard about it on the radio, the cops only have to suspect you of a crime. What crime – speeding? shoplifting?

Many automobiles now come preinstalled with GPS devices at extra cost. That means you can always be located, by friends, family, --or the police. GPS is a booming business; many cell phones have some sort of GPS location capability. (in addition to cell tower triangulation). It will become increasingly difficult to keep one’s location unknown.

Hopefully this will not pass in Sweden - web traffic:eek:

On 17 June the Swedish Parliament will vote on imposing the interception of all Swedish citizens. Defence Radioanstalt (FRA) be instructed to intercept all communications kabelburen crossing the borders of Sweden.
Almost all communication, even in Sweden, crossing the border today and will thereby be intercepted. E-mail, text messages, web traffic, chatting and mobile and telephone calls, all analyzed.
No court is involved. No offenders are required. All are treated as suspicious.
While the Government and authorities be given the power to look into the private communications. The law opens the way for new, arbitrary uses. The material can easily be misused or fall into the wrong hands.
Källskydd and meddelarfrihet become empty words when any contact with the media can be intercepted.
Avlyssningen to protect against undefined “external threats”. In fact, the new law in itself a serious threat to the open and free society.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.