D.R.I.: SW required for a short term CSLI Tower Dump

Finding short term CSLI obtained by a cell phone tower dump also protected by the Fourth Amendment, the court holds, disagreeing with other courts, that a warrant was required, but the good faith exception applies. An long, interesting opinion. “The ‘basic purpose of [the Fourth] Amendment’ is to ‘safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by government officials.’ Carpenter, 138 S. Ct. at 2213 (citation omitted). People quite reasonably assume that the Government should not be able to use your cell phone to spy on you. Here, the Government engaged in mass surveillance of an entire population for over four hours. This was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. [¶] The Court finds that Defendants have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their short-term CSLI, and thus a warrant was required for the Tower Dump Order.” United States v. Medina, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13031 (D.R.I. Jan. 23, 2024).

When a search warrant was signed is not an innocence issue for a successor habeas petition. In re Herrera, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 1678 (5th Cir. Jan. 24, 2024).*

The USPO got consent from defendant to open a closet door during a home check, and there was reasonable suspicion for the search. Also, protective sweep is rejected. United States v. Rivera-Pitre, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12207 (D.P.R. Jan. 18, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Cell site location information, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.