Supreme Court says police need a warrant for historical cell location records

Via ZDNet:

The Supreme Court has said that law enforcement must first seek a warrant before obtaining historical cell phone location records from phone companies, upending a near-decade long practice by police.

The court ruled 5-4 on the case, in what became one of the most awaited privacy legal decisions in the US this year.

The so-called "Carpenter" case had centered on the eponymous Timothy Carpenter, a criminal who was caught thanks to cell phone records in 2011. Law enforcement had obtained his location data from a phone provider without a search warrant, arguing the provider already had his data and Carpenter had no "reasonable expectation of privacy."

But the court found the government's warrantless access to cell-site records over a period of time "contravenes that expectation" of privacy, said (the court)....

The court stressed that the decision does not consider real-time tracking, or so-called "tower dumps," which police use to obtain information on all of the devices connected to a cell tower at during a particular period of time....

Police may, however, still obtain this data without a warrant in exigent circumstances, such as if there is an immediate threat or danger to life.

Read the complete decision here.

More on the Carpenter case here.

New York Appeals Court: Holding a GPS Device While Driving Violates Vehicle and Traffic Law

Matter of Clark v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 05133, 3rd Dept 6-22-17:

Petitioner was issued a summons for operating a motor vehicle while using a portable electronic device in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d after a police officer observed him driving while holding a global positioning system (hereinafter GPS) device in his right hand. Petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charge and, following a hearing before the Administrative Adjudication Bureau of respondent Department of Motor Vehicles, an Administrative Law Judge found petitioner guilty....

(A) hand-held GPS device meets the statutory definition of a "portable electronic device" inasmuch as it is a "hand-held device with mobile data access" (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d [2] [a]). In our view, it is mobile and receives data to

calculate a driver's geographical location and to communicate directions. Moreover, a review of the pertinent legislative history regarding Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d [*2]demonstrates that the Legislature intended Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d (2) (a) to encompass any portable electronic device that diverts a driver's attention away from the road and prevents the full use of a driver's hands (see Assembly Mem in Support, Bill Jacket, L 2009, ch 403 at 14; Letter from Dept of Motor Vehicles, Bill Jacket, L 2009, ch 403 at 20). Thus, we are satisfied that the Appeals Board's interpretation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d (2) (a) as encompassing a hand-held GPS device was rational (see generally Matter of Fineway Supermarkets v State Liq. Auth., 48 NY2d 464, 468 [1979]; Matter of Bonhomme v New York State Liq. Auth., 221 AD2d 882, 883 [1995]).

We also agree that there is ample support for the Appeals Board's determination that petitioner was using the GPS device. Petitioner concedes that, while he was driving, he was holding the device in his hand and "view[ing] the GPS navigation system to read directions." Accordingly, we find that the determination was supported by substantial evidence (see generally Matter of Hollinger v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 18 AD3d 1012, 1013 [2015]; Matter of Carota Enters. v Jackson, 241 AD2d 667, 668 [1997]). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit. 

Crackdown on distracted driving during Operation Hang Up

New York State Police:

The New York State Police announce a statewide crackdown on distracted driving as part of April’s National Distracted Driving Awareness Month. The crackdown, called Operation Hang Up, is a special enforcement effort to step up patrols and checkpoints targeting drivers on electronic devices from April 6 through April 10.

While tickets for cell phone use continue to decline, the proliferation of smartphones have caused texting tickets to rise every year since 2011.

April traditionally marks the start of the spring driving season. In order to minimize tragedies as the traffic volume increases, State Police and local law enforcement agencies will be cracking down on distracted driving, along with other vehicle and traffic law infractions.

U.S. Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

The Washington Times:

The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police cannot go snooping through people’s cell phones without a warrant, in a unanimous decision that amounts to a major statement in favor of privacy rights.

Police agencies had argued that searching through the data on cell phones was no different than asking someone to turn out his pockets, but the justices rejected that, saying a cell phone is more fundamental.

The ruling amounts to a 21st century update to legal understanding of privacy rights....

Justices even said police cannot check a cellphone’s call log, saying even those contain more information that just phone numbers, and so perusing them is a violation of privacy that can only be justified with a warrant.

The complete decision can be found here.

Privacy advocates, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have called the court’s decision a “big win.”