This issue went all the way to the Supreme Court. The fourth Amendment states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." The Supreme Court ruled that secretly placing a GPS unit on a vehicle, as well as monitoring that unit, without a search warrant denied the alledged criminal the very right that the fourth Amendment protects. The evidence collected from this type of search becomes inadmissable.
My view point on this issue is mixed. I want the criminal caught and the GPS may be the most cost effective and secretive way of gathering intel on a subject, rather than paying someone to tail his for many days. I also don't want my right of privacy and my right to a search and seizure, only when it is reasonable, to be taken away.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/23/justice/scotus-gps-tracking/index.html?iref=allsearch
I too agree with the SC's decision. If the government officials tracking the accused's whereabouts wanted to do so via GPS, all they had to do was apply for a search warrant in order to do what they did. It would have been that easy, but instead, they had to do it the hard way and abuse their police power, which in the end was a good move for the people of the US because this case was brought to light and ruled on by the SC. Having a search warrant is the essence of a "reasonable" search and seizure, and there are a few exceptions to the illegality of warrantless searches and seizures.
ReplyDeleteFor a good historical analysis of the 4th Amendment, constitutional scholar Leonard Levy has some good information in his book "Origins of the Bill of Rights."
http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Bill-Rights-Yale-Contemporary/dp/0300089015
Also this article has some good explanations on the exceptions to legal requirement of search warrants.
What gets my goat though is that vehicles and vessels are not considered "effects" and are therefore subject to warrantless searches under certain circumstances. And what about those who live on a boat and call their boat a "house?" Is their "house vessel" they live on not protected under the 4th Amendment then against warrantless searches?
Oops, I realized I didn't post the 2nd link on exceptions to warrant requirements for searches and seizures:
ReplyDeletehttp://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/03.html
Most members in my family work in public services. In my observation of those who are Police Officers and the way they conduct themselves, I laugh a little inside at their narrow minds and over opinionated nature. It is incredible to me how little a few of them know of the laws that they are to enforce. Had the Police Officers in this situation had knowledge of what constitutes a legal search or seizure they would have caught the bad guy and had no issues. Instead their "ego" and "power" got the best of them.
ReplyDeleteI think it starts with a GPS tracking device and ends with our 4th amendment right taken away. I do believe that the Police need to all take a constitutional class.
ReplyDeleteThe times are changing and so is the equiptment that officials use to apprehend suspects. What hasn't changed in a very long while is the requirement to obtain a search warrant prior to making a search. Be safe..use the warrant!
ReplyDelete