Skip to main content

If there is probable cause due to the activities of a drug trafficker, can a policeman place a GPS on the suspect's car without a search warrant?...

I would argue that the police officer acted illegally when he placed the GPS unit on the suspect’s car.  Therefore, any evidence collected by the GPS, or through investigations that were launched because of information from the GPS, should be excluded from evidence in a trial.


To prove this, we need to look first at United States v. Jones, which was a case that the Supreme Court decided in 2012.  In that case, law enforcement officers placed a GPS on a suspect’s car without a warrant.  The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that this was a violation of the 4th Amendment.  Clearly, then, warrantless GPS surveillance is generally illegal.


However, we know that courts do sometimes allow warrantless searches of people, cars, or even homes.  Most commonly, courts allow such searches when they are necessary to prevent the destruction of evidence.  In other words, imagine that a police officer has probable cause to believe that there are drugs in the back of a car.  If the officer does not search the car, the driver can very easily drive away and get rid of the drugs, thus destroying the evidence of the crime.  This leads us to ask whether the planting of the GPS is justifiable under this logic.


Here, too, I would argue that the answer is “no.”  We have no reason to believe that the police officer had to place the GPS when he did.  There is no reason to think that he could not wait to get a warrant.  The police presumably know where the drug dealer lives and could find his car again after they got a warrant.  For this reason, there is no emergency that requires the police to place the GPS without first obtaining a warrant.


Thus, we can see that it was illegal for the officer to plant the GPS.  Any information from the GPS is illegal and evidence gained on the basis of that information is “fruit from the poisonous tree.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more