OH8: Pre-Jones GPS tracking had no binding authority in state either way, so suppressed

Pre-Jones GPS tracking suppressed because there was no binding Ohio authority that said it could be done. Therefore, the court declines to apply the Davis good faith exception. State v. Allen, 2013 Ohio 4188, 997 N.E.2d 621 (8th Dist. 2013):

[*P33] Until the United States Supreme Court addresses questions left unanswered by Jones, specifically, what is the proper remedy when the governing law is unsettled, we will adopt a strict reading of Davis and apply the exclusionary remedy to suppress evidence gathered from a warrantless GPS initiative, because no binding precedent existed in our jurisdiction prior to Jones. Other jurisdictions have done the same. See United States v. Katzin, E.D. Pa. No. 11-226, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65677 (May 9, 2012); United States v. Lujan, N.D. Miss. No. 2:11CR11-SA, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95804 (July 10, 2012); United States v. Lee, E.D. Ky. No. 11-65-ART, 862 F. Supp.2d 560, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71204 (May 22, 2012); and United States v. Robinson, E.D. Mo. No. S2-4:11CR00361AGF(DDN), 903 F. Supp. 2d 766, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147793 (Oct. 15, 2012).

[*P34] The risk of institutionalizing a policy of permitting reliance on non-binding authority, particularly in the face of other, contrary non-binding authority, at least borders on being categorized as systemic negligence. Katzin, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65677. Indeed, allowing the government the shelter of the good-faith exception in this case would encourage law enforcement to beg forgiveness, rather than ask permission, in ambiguous situations involving basic civil rights. Id.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.