The Record: Oklahoma judge’s Flock ruling shows the power of Supreme Court’s digital evidence decision

The Record: Oklahoma judge’s Flock ruling shows the power of Supreme Court’s digital evidence decision by Suzanne Smalley:

Judge Sara Hill ruled October 1 that an arresting officer improperly used data from Flock brand ALPRs to build a case against Melisa Kyle — a decision heavily informed by the landmark June geofencing ruling, known as Chatrie, in which a majority of justices found that police searches of historical cell phone locations provided by third-party tech companies are limited by the Fourth Amendment …

Hill is correct that ALPRs can capture enough historical location information to require a warrant for database searches, according to Sidney Thaxter, who serves as a senior litigator for the Fourth Amendment Center at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. ‘ALPR networks run against us all even if we have not committed a crime and allow police to retroactively track our whereabouts with the press of a few buttons,’ Thaxter said via email. ‘This case correctly recognized that Chatrie holds that our location history is constitutionally protected and a warrant is required to track our physical movements,’ he added. The similarities between cellphone location records and ALPR records ‘practically leap off the page.’

This entry was posted in Automatic license plate readers. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.