W.D.Wis.: The court can take judicial notice of the reliability of GPS for probable cause

The court can take judicial notice of the reliability of GPS for probable cause. Here the question was probable cause for the arrest of a bank robbery suspect based on GPS tracking of the bait money. United States v. Mitchell, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124426 (E.D.Wis. June 25, 2015), adopted 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124434 (E.D. Wis. September 17, 2015):

Finally, Mitchell argues that even assuming dispatch was relying on the GPS data, the government failed to present evidence regarding the veracity and reliability of the data. In so arguing, Mitchell essentially equates the tracking device to a human confidential informant (seemingly because the GPS device is referred to as a “confidential source” over police radio). The confidential informant analysis only has limited application here. The GPS tracker is not a human being, so the usual concern with informants, such as veracity and disinterest, are not at issue. However, whether the technology being used is accurate and reliable does come into play. Special Agent Hruz, Wisconsin’s bank robbery coordinator for the FBI, testified that the majority of the banks in his jurisdiction (i.e., the State of Wisconsin) employ technology from 3SI, and explained in detail how 3SI’s tracking technology works. (Tr. 11-16.) Special Agent Hruz also testified that law enforcement receives a summary report of tracking data from 3SI and in every case involving a GPS tracker, a map is kept showing the device’s location updates. (Tr. 14.)

Further, at least one circuit has found that a court may take judicial notice of the accuracy and reliability of GPS technology. See United States v. Brooks, 715 F.3d 1069, 1078 (8th Cir. 2013). The Brooks court stated that:

We cannot conclude that the district court abused its discretion in taking judicial notice of the accuracy and reliability of GPS technology. Commercial GPS units are widely available, and most modern cell phones have GPS tracking capabilities. Courts routinely rely on GPS technology to supervise individuals on probation or supervised release, and, in assessing the Fourth Amendment constraints associated with GPS tracking, courts generally have assumed the technology’s accuracy.

Id. Thus, even if it was necessary for the government to show that dispatch’s source of information was reliable, I find that the GPS data was reliable. In the end, whether an arrest is constitutionally valid depends on whether at the moment of arrest the facts and circumstances within the officer’s knowledge and of which he had reasonably trustworthy information was sufficient to warrant a prudent man in believing the person had committed or was committing an offense. See Beck, 379 U.S. at 91. Here, Officer Albert had information that the person or persons who just robbed a bank were traveling a specific route. Given his continuous observation of the car traveling that route, he had probable cause to approach that car and arrest its occupant.