{"id":4459,"date":"2011-01-26T01:30:36","date_gmt":"2010-07-21T11:42:45","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-07-21T11:42:45","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4459","title":{"rendered":"WI: Use of a search warrant to place GPS on car was reasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"

The state procured a valid search warrant to put a GPS on defendant\u2019s car while investigating him for stalking. The issue of whether this was a search does not have to be decided. State v. Sveum<\/a>, 2010 WI 92, 328 Wis. 2d 369, 787 N.W.2d 317 (2010), affg 2009 WI App 81, 319 Wis. 2d 498, 769 N.W.2d 53 (Ct. App. 2009), 178 L. Ed. 2d 537 (U.S. Dec. 6, 2010)
\n:<\/p>\n

\u00b62 Sveum and the State have briefed two issues for purposes of our review: (1) whether the installation of a GPS tracking device to Sveum’s car while his car was parked in the driveway of his home and the subsequent electronic monitoring of Sveum’s car using the GPS constituted a search or seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 11 of the Wisconsin Constitution; and (2) whether the court order authorizing the installation and monitoring of a GPS tracking device on Sveum’s vehicle constituted a valid warrant and, if so, whether the police reasonably executed the warrant.<\/p>\n

\u00b63 We elect not to resolve the first issue, and assume, without deciding, that a search or seizure occurred in this case that required authorization by a warrant. We therefore decide only the second issue, concluding that the order authorizing law enforcement to install and monitor a GPS tracking device on Sveum’s vehicle constituted a valid warrant and that the officers’ execution of the warrant was reasonable. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Indeed, the best a privacy advocate could hope for is a search warrant before placing a GPS, like Kyllo’s thermal imaging of a house. No court will ever hold that a GPS with a search warrant on a car is unreasonable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4459","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4459","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4459"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4459\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4459"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4459"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4459"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}