PA applies Carpenter to 2015 CSLI search because no state case dealt with issue until after; applies to realtime CSLI, too

Defendant filed a motion to suppress CSLI from 2015 before Carpenter was even decided. Because no state case held that CSLI was not a search or the good faith exception applied and there were, in fact, cases holding that CSLI was a search, defendant gets the benefit of Carpenter. While Carpenter didn’t decide realtime CSLI, the court finds that Carpenter applies with greater force to it. Commonwealth v. Pacheco, 2019 PA Super 208 (July 3, 2019):

We see no meaningful distinction between the privacy issues related to historical as opposed to real-time CSLI. Indeed, in our view, the High Court’s rationale in Carpenter applies with equal, if not greater, force to real-time CSLI. Thus, we conclude that an individual maintains a legitimate expectation of privacy in the record of his physical movements as captured through both historical and real-time CSLI. Accordingly, prosecutors need to obtain a warrant supported by probable cause before obtaining this information.