IN: Cell phone ping to locate missing 13-year-old was with exigent circumstances

The ping of defendant’s cell phone to find him when a 13-year-old girl went missing was based on exigency under state statute. Brooks v. State, 2025 Ind. App. LEXIS 19 (Jan. 31, 2025).

All the factors supported reasonable suspicion: CI tip, flight, high-crime area, other evasive conduct. United States v. Rodgers, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17258 (W.D. La. Jan. 22, 2025).*

While recognizing that staleness in child pornography cases can have an nearly unlimited lifespan, “the Court is mindful that there is some limit on the bounds of evidence not becoming stale, even in the child pornography context, it finds this case does not cross the line.” There was probable cause and the good faith exception applies. United States v. Scherer, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17475 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 31, 2025).*

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in an LPN from being checked. United States v. Winters, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17401 (N.D. Iowa Jan. 31, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Geolocation data, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Staleness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.