TX8 sustains geofence warrant

TX8, El Paso without much discussion sustains a geofence warrant. Also the warrants for the phone and social media accounts were issued with probable cause and were particular. Alvarez v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 6106 (Tex. App. – El Paso Aug. 13, 2025):

As to particularity, we conclude the warrants at issue did not give officers “unbridled discretion” to conduct an overly broad search. Rather, the search warrant was narrowly tailored to capture only location data for suspects and potential witnesses of the offenses as the covered area only encompassed a 400-foot radius during a specified timeframe. This provided a degree of specificity that limited the information police would receive and minimized any infringement on privacy rights of persons who could not reasonably be regarded as either suspects or witnesses to the offenses. Id. at 625. To the extent Alvarez complains that additional warrants should have been obtained after the first step of the process, we further disagree. The Court of Criminal Appeals held that when the initial warrant is so narrowly tailored “as to provide probable cause, under the circumstances, to believe that whichever devices were revealed to have been present at the narrowly circumscribed place and time. . . would almost certainly have belonged to legitimate suspects, or potential witnesses, so that any additional disclosure of information via Steps Two and Three would be justified by the same probable cause that supported Step One.” Id. (citing Price, 310 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 546-47).

This entry was posted in Cell phones, geofence, Social media warrants. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.