GPS ruling complicates investigations
Reader poll
JANESVILLE — Rock County investigators will need to jump through an extra hoop to use GPS tracking devices in investigations, but Monday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling will have little other effect, spokesmen for two agencies said Monday.
In Walworth County, investigators already had been getting search warrants to install the tracking devices, Deputy District Attorney Josh Grube said.
The federal high court Monday ruled police and FBI investigators violated Washington, D.C., nightclub owner Antoine Jones' Fourth Amendment rights when they installed a GPS device on Jones' Jeep. They used the device to link Jones to a suburban house used to stash money and drugs. He was sentenced to life in prison before an appeals court overturned the conviction.
Justice Antonin Scalia said the government's installation of a GPS device, and its use to monitor the vehicle's movements, constitutes a search, meaning that a warrant is required.
"By attaching the device to the Jeep" that Jones was using, "officers encroached on a protected area," Scalia wrote. He concluded that the installation of the device on the vehicle without a warrant was a trespass and therefore an illegal search.
All nine justices concurred, although their supporting reasons differed.
Rock County Sheriff's Office deputies regularly use GPS devices to track vehicles during burglary and drug investigations, among others, Sheriff Bob Spoden said. The obligation to get a search warrant before installing the device could complicate an investigation by requiring investigators to write an affidavit for search warrant and get that affidavit signed, Spoden said.
But Rock County investigators already had been doing what they would need to do to get the warrant signed, even though they weren't taking that formal step, Spoden said.
"It certainly is going to make our job more difficult," Spoden said. "However, whenever we make that decision (to install a tracking device), we always have enough evidence and enough probable cause to get a search warrant."
Investigations can be fast-paced, and getting search warrants can be cumbersome, Spoden said. In some cases, investigators could get a tip that a suspect's vehicle is parked somewhere for a certain amount of time, Spoden said as an example.
"It really creates a very narrow window," he said.
Sgt. Jim Holford with the Janesville Police Department's street crimes unit said Janesville investigators also have been getting enough information to seek a search warrant, even though they weren't getting warrants to install GPS units.
"It shouldn't affect us in any other way except for giving us another layer of paperwork to complete," he said.
Investigators decide to install GPS devices based on probable cause, Holford said.
"Now, we'll just have to articulate that probable cause, and have that documented in the affidavit for the search warrant prior to placing the GPS device on a vehicle, "Holford said.
If asked, the Supreme Court could rule in the future on other aspects of using GPS in investigations. In another concurring opinion Monday, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the act of trespassing by installing the device was not as important as the suspect's expectation of privacy.
In the Jones case, police monitored the Jeep's movements for four weeks after attaching the GPS device.
"The use of longer-term GPS monitoring in investigations of most offenses impinges on expectations of privacy," Alito wrote.
The Supreme Court could "have to grapple" with the issue of duration in the future, but did not need to rush to make that decision, Scalia wrote.
Holford said it would have a bigger effect on investigations in Janesville if the Supreme Court ruled about how long a device could be used or for what types of crime.
Because the ruling on GPS tracking had been pending, Walworth County investigators already had been getting search warrants before installing GPS devices, Grube said.
"We've been going the warrant route," Grube said. "We just go the safe route."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Jan 27, 2012 at 9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Only in your brainwashed mind.
Jan 26, 2012 at 5:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
All legal activity done without a warrant... You make my point.
Jan 26, 2012 at 10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
By the way,placing a GPS unit on someone's car is "fishing". Just like walking a dog through a school or a park to sniff randomly.
Jan 26, 2012 at 10:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
The one. Freedom and privacy are not "catch words", they are the principles that this great country was founded on. You just proved how far law enforcment goes to justify their actions. Police created the "us vs. them mentality". You, sir, are a large part of the problem. Qualifier: just to let people know that this has nothing to do with sour grapes, I haven't had anything to do with law enforcment in over 25 years, and then only minor traffic offenses.
Jan 26, 2012 at 4:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Fschultz,
In my opion, just the fact that a search warrant is deemed required by the Appelet Courts causes a set back to law enforcement, as it opens a window for defense attorney's to attack... Suppression, or challenges to the legality of a search warrant for whatever reason would most likely lead in the suppression of evidence. All this when it's even questionable as to whether this is even a true search and seizure.
Jan 26, 2012 at 4:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mr. Andrew Jackson,
The constitution, and specificly the 4th amendment which i believe you are trying to reference when tou say the right to" privicy"; deals with protections agianst unreasonable searches and seizures. How placing a GPS unit in any way limits your right to being searched or seized is a long shot... It's no different then undercover surveillance. Using the word "constitution" then throwing in some catch words like feedom, and privacy doesn't cut it.
Jan 25, 2012 at 2:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
I can't believe they've already been doing this locally. Makes me want to puke! I thought only the FBI and DHS were doing this on big-time criminal cases.
-
Time to reclaim out civil liberties. Vote for Ron Paul and everyone like him who dares to run!
Jan 25, 2012 at 1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
"This has nothing to do with the everyday law abiding citizen who lives a normal and legal lifestyle." The constitution applies to suspected criminals as well. This merely makes it so that law enforcement actually has to get a warrant to track people. It’s not like it is that hard to simply do their jobs. I see that as a good thing. You want to know why people are against cops who don’t want to have to do their jobs it is because of people like this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aPj6dYrq... its pretty simple I have a right to not be searched without probable cause, a judge determines if you have probable cause, simple.
Jan 25, 2012 at 12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
The One: If telephonic search warrants are so easy, how is this ruling a setback? Just tryin to understand.
Jan 25, 2012 at 12:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
maybe they could just stamp a number on our wrist.. oh wait that has been done, sorry
Jan 25, 2012 at 11:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
Well i really dont have it out for the police but what i can say is its about privacy and our right to it. how would u like it if they gps'd someones car and that person came to your house and they decided they had enough evidence to raid Your house, they break down your front door and tear your house apart only to have it be a mistake they dont clean it up the dont pay for a new door and then all ur neighbors think you run a drug house or what ever because your house got raided. its happen to me so no i dont think they should be able to do that i believe its a violation of My privacy.
Jan 25, 2012 at 11:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_One, the Constitution wasn't written "if you have nothing to worry about" for a very good reason. Two of the reasons being FREEDOM and PRIVACY.
Jan 25, 2012 at 10:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
For the life of me, I can’t understand how the majority of the posts on this issue are negative towards the tools these investigators are using... Unless you are the suspects in one or all of the crimes listed, where the investigators are using GPS units, what is your complaint? This has nothing to do with the everyday law abiding citizen who lives a normal and legal lifestyle. The only ones that I would think should have issues with this are the suspects to the respective crimes being committed... This is just another example of people complaining just to complain. I can’t see how any average “Joe” could be upset on this issue. Let’s strap on some big people pants; the establishment or “the man” isn’t trying to get you. They really don’t care about you, they just want to solve some crimes.
Jan 25, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Look, as probably one of the few pro-law enforcement members out here, this is a setback to law enforcement in this State. That being said, and as Chelleandlou mentioned, evidence must be established before a GPS unit is installed, or how do they know who’s vehicle to install them on... random guessing? I believe there is a thing call a telephonic search warrants that eliminate the delay, and allows officers to get search warrants right away... so the affidavit issue seems like a mute point.
Jan 25, 2012 at 9:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sad to say but if that's ok why cant they just install chips in us then they will know where we all are all the time its not incriminating just tells them where we are no who we are with lol
Jan 25, 2012 at 8:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Studs: This has nothing to do with schools and kids.
Imjustsayin: As if the officers jobs aren't difficult enough already. It can be time consuming filling out paperwork and in cases where the amount of time may be short can threaten installing the device thereby leading to more criminal activity.
Allin: More like score one for the criminals.
JohnDoe: Really...I think he was a cop much longer than he's been a politician. Of course you're welcome to run against him in the next election if you can do better.
Smartypants: I agree, if people would read the 4th Amendment they might get a better understanding. A GPS does not search or seize anything. It cannot incriminate or provide evidence of anything other than the location of a vehicle at a particular time. It doesn't identify the driver or passengers, it doesn't record illegal activity or detect illegal substances..so how it violates the 4th Amendment is still unclear to me.
Jan 25, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Just wondering should all the people caught and sentenced by Janesville police be found not guilty now and released by the admittance of the janesville police that they installed gps on many cases without first getting a search warrent?
Jan 24, 2012 at 11:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
The obligation to get a search warrant before installing the device could complicate an investigation by requiring investigators to write an affidavit for search warrant and get that affidavit signed, Spoden said.
What Spoden Actually meant to say was , We as duly sworn Law enforcement officers find it soo much easier Not to follow the law when investigating suspected criminal activity . When we know there guilty the actual legal procedures just slow us down . Warrant, we dont need no stinking warrant .
Jan 24, 2012 at 10:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Even the Bill of Rights prevails some times.
Jan 24, 2012 at 9:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yup...Spoden is a politician, not a person concerned about your constitutional rights.
Jan 24, 2012 at 8:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cue the "small government" conservatives and their law enforcement fetish in 3...2....1...
Jan 24, 2012 at 8:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Score one for the citizens.
Jan 24, 2012 at 5:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
If the main thing Bob Spoden is worried about is how this is going to "make our job more difficult", and "another layer of paperwork to complete", then I don't think he should be in the position of Sheriff in my opinion. Sorry the Constitution keeps getting in your way, Bob.
I'm just sayin'...
Jan 24, 2012 at 4:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
If they "had already been doing this" (not quite, it turns out), then why is it a hassle? Those hoops are called our liberty. Should have to get warrants before they hassle our kids and turn our schools into prisons.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.