© 2019 by Law Offices of Michael F. Niznik

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon

Every case is different. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for an individual case or situation. Viewing the information on this site, or sending a message to our firm through this site, does not create an attorney-client relationship and will not entail a confidential communication. 

Police Can Access Your Phone Location Data Without a Warrant

February 28, 2018

 

Is it a privacy violation for police to access your phone location data without a warrant? I’d venture to say that most Americans feel this type of search is not proper. There is a case currently pending before the Supreme Court called Carpenter v. United States, which will determine the legality of such a search.

 

The case involves a number of robberies in Michigan. Police investigating the robberies requested the location data from the defendant’s cell phone company without a warrant, and the cell phone company readily turned that information over.

 

The government argues that the cell phone company is a “third party” and that location data is a business record that it is allowed to request. The government believes that this location information should be accessible to police without a search warrant because it is not being accessed directly from the defendant’s phone or property.  

 

If the Supreme Court rules for the government in Carpenter and allows warrantless location data searches, we can expect searches to expand beyond just cell phones. With the advent of autonomous cars, the government would be able to see where your car traveled, when, and how fast, just by submitting paperwork to your car manufacturer. Imagine the speeding tickets you could receive!

 

I believe this type of intrusion is against the principles set forth in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution which 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, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

 

IF the Supreme Court rules for the police in Carpenter, this type of government intrusion can be prevented by enacting laws that forbid the government from accessing location information without a warrant. California has recently enacted the Electronic Communications Privacy Act which imposes a warrant requirement, but other states must follow suit.  

 

Michael F. Niznik is a Philadelphia criminal defense attorney representing clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey. We maintain two offices for your convenience – in Philadelphia and Montgomery County, Pennsylvania (Norristown). We provide free consultations for Pennsylvania and New Jersey criminal and personal injury matter. We can be reached 24/7 at 267-589-0601 or online at www.NiznikLaw.com.

 

Tags: Philadelphia criminal defense attorney, Philadelphia criminal lawyer, Philadelphia criminal attorney, Philadelphia DUI lawyer, Philadelphia DUI attorney, Philadelphia car accident lawyer, Norristown personal injury attorney, Norristown car accident lawyer, Norristown slip and fall lawyer, Philadelphia auto dealer lawyer, Philadelphia car dealer lawyer, Norristown auto dealer lawyer, Norristown car dealer lawyer, Philadelphia auto fraud lawyer, Philadelphia car fraud lawyer, Norristown lemon law lawyer, Philadelphia lemon law lawyer.

 

Please reload

Featured Posts

Examples of New Jersey Car Dealer Fraud

October 9, 2018

1/10
Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

Archive
Please reload

Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square