9th Circuit Appeals Court rules that GPS tracking of vehicles doesn't require a warrant.

[*Shinzon*]

Reading fail.



Believed, not evidence of.

For them to believe there was something there at one point, they would of needed some kind of proof verifying that yes? Let's not split hairs here. We're not talking about whether or not the evidence was any good or admissible. Evidence would simply have to be some sort of proof. You don't just believe something about of thin air.

The police busted in and shot up the place based on faulty evidence
They didn't even bother getting a no-knock warrant for their no-knock raid
No one in the house had anything to do with the pot

What part of this is the part that isn't sinking in?

What the hell are you talking about? That story is about officers conducting a drug sting. You're trying to link two completely different things. They delivered a package, once that package was inside the house the officers could legally enter the house and that's it. That has nothing to do with a no knock warrant. It's the same as buying dope off an officer on the street. They can stop you right then and there. They wouldn't need a warrant to search your car to find the dope they just sold you.

[BerenTebogo]

Shinzon stop being so fucking obtuse.

[Korietsu]

For them to believe there was something there at one point, they would of needed some kind of proof verifying that yes? Let's not split hairs here. We're not talking about whether or not the evidence was any good or admissible. Evidence would simply have to be some sort of proof. You don't just believe something about of thin air.

He was believed to have it because the burglar that robbed him made a false accusation to save his ass some jail time. That's enough to justify belief to cover their asses in court.

[Priran]

If having indoor plumbing is enough to justify a belief that they might attempt to destroy evidence, I can only wonder what sort of bulletproof, compelling physical evidence lets you say the dude "may have had some marijuana plants at some point".

[Drex]

Someone leave a package of cocaine on Shinzon's doorstep and phone him in as a druglord

[Acturus]

Clearly this is a veiled attempt by home builders and garage door installers everywhere to boost their revenue.

[falloutboy14]

So, does this mean that anyone can do this? Not a lawyer, but since there's no expectation of privacy, is there a legal difference between the police doing this and the general population?

Stalkers of the world unite!

[Nephlite]

Not gonna get in to the other argument since it's going in circles. So, let's look at this one:

So, does this mean that anyone can do this? Not a lawyer, but since there's no expectation of privacy, is there a legal difference between the police doing this and the general population?

Stalkers of the world unite!

The whole reasonable expectation of privacy is in place because unless you stick your car in the garage, it's viewable from any angle from the sidewalk, and in theory anything you have inside the car is also viewable from any angle. Because of this, i'm thinking they could argue that it's not technically an invasion of privacy since it falls under the plain view doctrine.

In some states, curtilage protects your property around your house and in some cases, out to the street. So I suspect if you had your car parked in the driveway, one can argue that it falls under the curtilage law and that proceeds from government action violated the Fourth unless you had a warrant. In D.C., there is no such curtilage law (unless your yard is protected by a fence, and it has to be a privacy fence, not a chain linker or doggie fence) so people in D.C. are definitely screwed by this ruling.

In my department, I haven't heard of people using such tactics as bugging cars unless it's a very special circumstance (i.e. bugging a top ranking government officials POV because of suspected corruption) but even then, they had to secure a warrant. I'm thinking though if they didn't really need to get a warrant, they probably just thought to grab one just for the purposes of CYA (Cover Your Ass). Interpretation of the law goes in so many tangents and police are notorious for stretching laws to accommodate their tactics. So reading about this makes me think the backstory has to do something with going off gut instinct, good faith, or just plain old fashioned police work to get the job done. Stretching it? Maybe. But if it does some good then the benefit outweighs the misdeed.

As for normal everyday people doing this, it happens all the time. Is it legal? Unless it's your car, you can't bug someone elses car. In D.C. it's written in to the stalking statute. Someone mentioned earlier that the civilian GPS system is flawed/bugged or just not powerful enough and it's true, however, tracking someone's movement for the specific intent to cause fear, or undue distress, etc. is illegal and can net you some serious time. Like most charges of this nature though, the government has to prove specific intent so if you say "Just did it cause I can." they'd have to hit you with something else. Not sure what else they could get you on but there's probably a charge in the cybercrime division they could stick on you. The difference in any case of civilian vs. police is government action is controlled and by nature can't be used for criminal intent. Hope that somewhat answers the question and wasn't too confusing.

[*Shinzon*]

The law still hasn't really caught up with a lot of the advances made and technology really starts to blur a lot of issues and reasonable expectation of privacy is one issue that's going to be thoroughly examined.

Also lets quickly look at that issue with the Mayor using a better article from CNN:

(CNN) -- A Maryland mayor is asking the federal government to investigate why SWAT team members burst into his home without knocking and shot his two dogs to death in an investigation into a drug smuggling scheme.

"This has been a difficult week and a half for us," Cheye Calvo, mayor of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, said Thursday. "We lost our family dogs. We did it at the hands of sheriff's deputies who burst through our front door, rifles blazing."

The raid last week was led by the Prince George's County Police Department, with the sheriff's special operations team assisting, after a package of marijuana was sent to Calvo's home.

Authorities say the package was part of a scheme in which drugs are mailed to unknowing recipients and then intercepted.

Calvo said he had just returned home from walking his two Labrador retrievers, Chase and Payton, when his mother-in-law told him a package had arrived for his wife, Trinity Tomsic.

Moments later, Calvo was in his room changing for a meeting when he heard commotion downstairs.

"The door flew open," he said. "I heard gunfire shoot off. There was a brief pause and more gunfire."

Calvo said he was brought downstairs at gunpoint in his boxer shorts, handcuffed and forced onto the floor with his mother-in-law near the carcass of one of dead dogs. Video Watch Calvo describe the raid »

"I noticed my two dead dogs lying in pools of their own blood," Calvo said.

Calvo said his mother-in-law is still recovering from the incident.

"She got the worst of it," Calvo said. "She was literally in the kitchen, cooking a lovely pasta dish, and they brought down the door and shot our dogs."

While he was being held, Calvo said, he told police he is the town's mayor, but they didn't believe him.

Berwyn Heights has its own police force, he said, but Prince George's County police did not notify the municipal authorities of their interest in his home or the package.

"They didn't know my name. All they knew was my wife's name. They matched that to the registration of the car," Calvo said. "It was that lack of communication that really led to what has really been the most traumatic experience of our lives."

After the raid, arrests were made in the package interception scheme.

The incident has prompted the couple to call for a federal investigation because, they say, they don't believe police are capable of conducting an internal investigation.

"They've said they've done nothing wrong," Calvo said. "I didn't sign up for this fight, but I think what we have to do now is make changes to how Prince George's County police and Prince George's County sheriff's department operate."

Calvo said authorities entered his home without knocking and refused to show him a warrant when he requested one.

But Prince George's County Police Department spokeswoman Sharon Taylor said legal counsel had informed her that "no-knock" warrants do not exist in Maryland.

Taylor said authorities were acting on a warrant issued based on information available to them at the time.

"This warrant was for permission to search the premises," she said. "The special operations team that supported us made a decision about the necessity of entry at the point of being on the scene."

"No-knock" warrants have drawn criticism before. In Atlanta, Georgia, Kathryn Johnston, 92, was shot to death by police in a botched drug raid involving such a warrant in November.

Taylor, a self-described dog lover, expressed sympathy for the loss of Calvo's dogs, but stopped short of apologizing for the incident.

"We've done these similar kinds of operations over and over again, to the tune of removing billions of dollars of drugs from the community and without people or animals being harmed," she said. "We don't want any of our operations to result in the injury or loss of anybody, and certainly not animals."

The deputies have said they killed the two animals because they felt threatened.

"I would say that the dogs presented a threat, I would imagine, to the special operations situation," Taylor said.

Meanwhile, Calvo and his wife said members of the community have expressed sympathy and concern about the incident.
advertisement

At a news conference Thursday, Tomsic tearfully recalled a recent encounter with a neighbor who used to wave at the couple as they walked Payton and Chase.

"She gave me a big hug," Tomsic said. "She said, 'If the police shot your dogs dead and did this to you, how can I trust them?'"

Ok so here we see that the operation the police were involved with was a drug smuggling scheme were packages were sent to unknowing individuals and those packages were intercepted by another party, the smugglers. The police attempted to divert one of those packages to the mayors residence to draw out whoever or whatever group was intercepting the packages.

The problem here is that the Sheriff department, conducting the operation, didn't do their work. Their ineptitude to properly prepare for the operation and then execute it is what created the problem. They didn't communicate with the local police department which would of have information like who the residence belonged too and who lived there. On top of that, no knock warrants don't exist in Maryland which means the officers had to identify themselves and didn't. So lets not blame the warrant before looking at what the cops did. As is the case in the other articles mentioned, poor preparation on the part of police is what caused the issue, having the warrant didn't all of a sudden create the situation.

The cops blew their operation big time, didn't do prep work, and failed to properly execute a search warrant leading to the death of the animals and the traumatic experience for the people in the house. Blame the cops, and not the tool. Hope that better relays my point and why I defended the warrant. The cops were in the wrong 100%, but the nature of the warrant was not to blame. I'm not going to defend idiot cops but I will defend useful tools that the justice and legal system relies on.

[Effluo]

So, does this mean that anyone can do this? Not a lawyer, but since there's no expectation of privacy, is there a legal difference between the police doing this and the general population?

Stalkers of the world unite!

I'm not sure of the legality of it all, but I know a couple of Private Investigators that do it quite often. Granted, to be a PI requires you be licensed by the state so who knows.

[vagus]

Gonna need a GPS scrambler and other high tech gizmo's when i travel to the US. Gonna be crazy when i move to the US. Lol.

[Priran]

The problem here is that the Sheriff department, conducting the operation, didn't do their work. Their ineptitude to properly prepare for the operation and then execute it is what created the problem. They didn't communicate with the local police department which would of have information like who the residence belonged too and who lived there... The cops blew their operation big time, didn't do prep work, and failed to properly execute a search warrant leading to the death of the animals and the traumatic experience for the people in the house.

And as that map posted earlier shows, this is clearly the only time this has ever happened and we should continue allowing law enforcement to storm people's houses with guns blazing like john fucking rambo because it's cool. 9/11.

[Skotty]

Police are the only people who can and do use this "tool." You can't remove them from the equation just because it hurts your argument. Perhaps if the police were more diligent in investigating the people they are targeting instances like this wouldn't happen and people wouldn't be so against no-knock warrants.

[archibaldcrane]

The thing is, GPS or no, the police can legally track your vehicle for the most part. They can put helicopters in the air, follow your car around with squad cars, etc.

The only place they can't legally track you is in a place where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. But the question is - when they do use a GPS device (even if it's installed on your car while it is parked in a public street) - do they have to stop monitoring the location of your vehicle when you do drive into a gated community, or deep into your 40 acres of private hunting land, or into your enclosed garage, or whatever?

Obviously I'm 100% sure they don't cease surveillance in these cases, and that's how this practice should be attacked in the courts - instead of attacking it based on where the vehicle was parked when the GPS device was installed.

[*Shinzon*]

And as that map posted earlier shows, this is clearly the only time this has ever happened and we should continue allowing law enforcement to storm people's houses with guns blazing like john fucking rambo because it's cool. 9/11.

Did you actually explore and click the items on that map? That map nearly validates all of what I just said. Police ineptitude or failure to properly analyze and obtain credible information is the primary reason for most if not nearly all innocent death or fruitless raids. If you eliminate the use of the no knock warrant, you'd still have raids on wrong apartments and you'd still have issues like the deaf woman's apartment being raided on Long Island. Your issue seems to be with the fact police can enter your house. They don't need a no knock warrant to do that, search and arrest warrants provide the same effect and police can absolutely enter your house armed and use force if you resist or if they feel threatened. Only proper police work solves those issues and reduces innocent death/harm and wasted resources on botched raids.

Nearly every one of those dots in the Tri-state NY, NJ, CT area are as a result of bad police work and bad intelligence.

The thing is, GPS or no, the police can legally track your vehicle for the most part. They can put helicopters in the air, follow your car around with squad cars, etc.

The only place they can't legally track you is in a place where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. But the question is - when they do use a GPS device (even if it's installed on your car while it is parked in a public street) - do they have to stop monitoring the location of your vehicle when you do drive into a gated community, or deep into your 40 acres of private hunting land, or into your enclosed garage, or whatever?

Obviously I'm 100% sure they don't cease surveillance in these cases, and that's how this practice should be attacked in the courts - instead of attacking it based on where the vehicle was parked when the GPS device was installed.

Well that ends up being the issue really. What really defines your expectation of privacy, and what can or can't they monitor and where. If your car, despite being property, does not provide with a reasonable expectation of privacy, what does? Does that mean police can wire your front lawn if it's not gated. Are conversations in your car private? I mean in your car you can roll up the windows and close the doors, I'd say that's private and deserves the same expectation as your home. I don't think this ruling will last very long.

[archibaldcrane]

Well that ends up being the issue really. What really defines your expectation of privacy, and what can or can't they monitor and where. If your car, despite being property, does not provide with a reasonable expectation of privacy, what does? Does that mean police can wire your front lawn if it's not gated. Are conversations in your car private? I mean in your car you can roll up the windows and close the doors, I'd say that's private and deserves the same expectation as your home. I don't think this ruling will last very long.

Remember, they're just monitoring the location of the vehicle, not the conversations. It's not a bug, it's a GPS-tracker - in theory it's just a more efficient way of doing what the police could do anyway...except for when the location of the car is in a place (like deep into private property) where the police couldn't monitor its location without a warrant.

[Priran]

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8393/igiveup.jpg

Keep pretending it's in any way reasonable to gamble lives on the theoretical possibility that it will be easier to prosecute someone. You're a champion.

[*Shinzon*]

Remember, they're just monitoring the location of the vehicle, not the conversations. It's not a bug, it's a GPS-tracker - in theory it's just a more efficient way of doing what the police could do anyway...except for when the location of the car is in a place (like deep into private property) where the police couldn't monitor its location without a warrant.

Right but if they can touch your "property" or alter your property without consent or permission for one thing, then it opens the door to do something else. That's more or less where I was going with that. A car would be property and they could argue that any property falls under that situation.

[Cyn]

Gonna need a GPS scrambler and other high tech gizmo's when i travel to the US. Gonna be crazy when i move to the US. Lol.

Why in the world would you leave Vancouver for the US?

[Doombard]

and if the car is not my property then why the hell do I pay property taxes on it? when I already paid sales tax on it, when it already had sales tax paid on it when the first person bought it... and on and on and on. Oh well wtf can you do?