E.D.Ky.: No REP in CSLI

Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his banking records and even in his CSLI. “Finally, Defendant cites persuasive authority holding that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in CSLI. See D.E. 51 at 29. However, none of his cited authority is binding upon this Court. Skinner [see here], based on the factual record here, controls. Therefore, the Court finds that Defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the CSLI data obtained and used by law enforcement.” United States v. Wigginton, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166234 (E.D.Ky. Oct. 28, 2015), adopted in part and overruled in part (Fifth Amendment) 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165401 (E.D.Ky. Dec. 10, 2015).

Defendant gave consent to enter to look for a fugitive, and the officers saw the barrel and receiver of a rifle partially hidden yet in plain view. Because he was a known felon, the incriminating nature was apparent. United States v. Jamerson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165465 (E.D.Mich. Dec. 10, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Cell site location information, Plain view, feel, smell, Third Party Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.