FL5: Trial court’s order suppressing warrantless black box search affirmed for lack of a record

The trial court granted a motion to suppress the search of defendant’s car’s black box (“event data recorder”). The state on appeal seeks to depart from State v. Worsham, 227 So. 3d 602, 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in the black box. Denied. “However, based on the insufficiency of the record—including a suppression hearing without any witnesses or factual stipulations—we have no occasion to analyze the reasoning in Worsham which, among other things, likened EDRs to cell phones.” Also, n.1: “Further, the parties have not advanced any argument as to whether the physical entry into the defendant’s vehicle to download data from the EDR constituted a search under the trespass theory. See Mobley v. State, 834 S.E.2d 785, 792 (Ga. 2019) (‘The retrieval of data without a warrant at the scene of the collision was a search and seizure that implicates the Fourth Amendment, regardless of any reasonable expectations of privacy.’).” State v. Pierre, 2020 Fla. App. LEXIS 6415 (Fla. 5th DCA May 8, 2020).

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Standards of review, Surveillance technology. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.