NY Court Says Police Can't Track Suspect With GPS 414
SoundGuyNoise sends in a story that brings into relief just how unsettled is the question of whether police can use GPS to track suspects without a warrant. Just a couple of days ago a Wisconsin appeals court ruled that such tracking is OK; and today an appeals court in New York reached the opposite conclusion. "It was wrong for a police investigator to slap a GPS tracking device under a defendant's van to track his movements, the state's top court ruled today. A sharply divided NY Court of Appeals, in a 4-3 decision, reversed the burglary conviction of defendant Scott Weaver, 41, of Watervliet. Four years ago, State Police tracked Weaver over 65 days in connection with the burglary investigation."
Stolen device has GPS? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Headline is inaccurate (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What's the matter with these cops? (Score:5, Interesting)
You mean the police should actually demonstrate integrity by making sure they obey the law they're sworn to uphold!
Re:Headline is inaccurate (Score:1, Interesting)
This is why we have a hierarchical court system.
What's Good for the Goose (Score:4, Interesting)
I understand the argument that GPS tracking is not significantly more intrusive than tailing.
But I wonder how police officers would react if GPS devices were surreptitiously placed on their cruisers.
Re:Did he still steal stuff? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes. That's the whole point of having a judicial system. It spells out how the police and the legal profession must act to bring cases to trial. If you're going to abandon that system, then I don't suppose you have a problem with police coming into your house at any time of the day or night to see if you are breaking any laws.
Improper procedures should not cause a case to be overturned unless of course it could be shown that the person was guilty only because of the improper procedures.
If you, as the police or prosecutor, can't be bothered to follow proper procedures, who's to say you didn't make up evidence to indict someone? It stands to reason if whatever procedures are in place weren't followed, how does the court know that what it is asked to rule on is valid?
To use the well-worn phrase: Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.
Re:Did he still steal stuff? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What's the matter with these cops? (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't they just ask for a warrant, and not have to worry whether the case is going to be thrown out?
They could have tried to get a warrant. They probably didn't because they didn't have enough evidence to get a warrant and they decided to play a hunch.
Here's an interesting question (Score:3, Interesting)
Say the police in state A* attach a GPS tracker to a car sans warrant, then say that the owner of that car drives to a different state, B**; would evidence collected whilst the vehicle was in State B count? Would the officers in State A be exposing themselves to actual liability (as opposed to the evidence simply being thrown out) in State B?
*Wisconsin
**New York
Re:Did he still steal stuff? (Score:3, Interesting)
Does it matter? (Score:3, Interesting)
There are instances in which the police may wish to track someone in order to gather intelligence. This information will never appear as evidence in court. So, they'll go on planting GPS units wherever they want. They'll just have to manufacture some probable cause to make a stop.
This sort of thing has been done for ages. The cops know who the 'bad' people are. And they've got a pretty good feel for when they're up to no good. So, where something like running a stop sign or failure to signal a lane change are overlooked for the general public, the usual suspects will get pulled over, patted down and have their vehicle tossed*. GPS technology just allows them to collect intelligence from the comfort of a donut shop instead of actually patrolling a neighborhood.
*A friend of mine in the local PD refers to this as charging someone with "Mopery with intent to gawk".
Re:Headline is inaccurate (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, hopefully with the recent trend of more states trying to assert more of states rights...maybe these will be repealed.
I heard something on the news this morning, of something going on in Montana with their gun laws [uprisingradio.org] that are challenging the Fed. interestate commerce powers. Since this is tied to guns, it just may fasttrack itself to the SCOTUS. I for one sure would love to see much of the Fed's power struck down and more narrowly define the interstate commerce powers the Federal govt. has used to strong arm the states over a lot of things.
Re:Headline is inaccurate (Score:1, Interesting)
those are the most fscked up things I've ever seen when traveling.
This is why there are both pros and cons to heterogeneity in law. Coming from a Canadian perspective, I'm glad that criminal law is federal. I can travel from province to province without the already complex labyrinth of criminal law shifting beneath my feet. (It still shifts a bit because of differences in provincial case law, but less than an entirely different statutory framework.)
Questions (Score:3, Interesting)
2) How do I detect whether or not a GPS receiver has been attached to my car?
3) If this box was there for 2 months, it must be drawing power from the car battery. Doesn't that make it a lot easier to detect? Doesn't that also mean that it is probably only working when the car ignition is on?
4) GPS signals from satellites are low-power, therefore they must be easy to jam. Isn't there a potential market for devices that do just that? You probably only need to jam the signal when the ignition is on. Better yet, transmit false GPS data and really mess with the cops' minds.
State vs US from a Southerner. (Score:2, Interesting)
For all the crap people give the south, I'm glad y'all are realizin' what the whole "state rights" thing was about. I always read with interest the rants most recently from Cali and Texas governments about their relationship with the Fed.
Re:State vs US from a Southerner. (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, I am from and live in the deep south. My college roommate once joked that anyone born north of I-10 (that passes through New Orleans) was a yankee. He was a bit stringent on that definition...hahaha.
But, rather than get into a discussion on the war of northern aggression, lets let the past be where it is...enjoy the fact that we are still one large country, but, try to undo some of the ill effects of the past, and support these laws that are trying to help reassert states' rights, and give the 10th amendment some teeth again.
Wolves, Sheepdog, Sheeple (Score:3, Interesting)
I can't tell you how overjoyed I am to hear that one of our courts has remembered there are limits to police power.
Unfortunately, the men with the uniforms and guns aren't worrying about such trivia. Have you spoken to any police officers lately? If you don't happen to work in municipal systems or security like I do, hop over to the forums at "officer.com" for an eye-opening read.
The current meme running among police officers is "wolves, sheepdogs and sheeple." That is, the "bad guys" are wolves, cops are sheepdogs, and the civilians are sheep. Sheep are worthless, stupid and deserve to get skinned.
The last member of a SWAT team I met told me a joke. He stomped on the ground twice and spit toward his foot. "You know what that is?" he asked. I shook my head "no." He grinned and said "cop cpr." When I asked if that was the procedure for criminals or victims, he called me a liberal fraker.
Another cop was telling me a story, well bragging really, and a footnote to the story was that a teenage girl was injured. When I asked him why that happened, he responded in fairly rough terms that officer safety took priority over all other considerations. I told him that during my time on base, we were always told that armed men in uniform were supposed to put themselves in harm's way to protect the civilians. Again, in rather rude terms, the officer responded that he didn't care how many civilians were killed, but that he was absolutely not going to expose himself or his fellow officers to real danger.
The court decisions are wonderful, but until we fix the broken traditions and discipline within our nation's police departments, it's an academic exercise at best.
Re:Headline is inaccurate (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Headline is inaccurate (Score:3, Interesting)