Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 09/24/2026 View Wed 09/23/2026 View Tue 09/22/2026 View Mon 09/21/2026 View Sun 09/20/2026 View Sat 09/19/2026 View Fri 09/18/2026
2026-07-09 -Land of the Free
Court rules that law enforcement’s use of geofence warrant was a search
[SCOTUSblog] Updated on June 29 at 3:50 p.m.

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that when law enforcement officials used a “geofence warrant” – a warrant that instructed Google to provide location data for cellphone users who were near a particular place during a specific time period – to obtain evidence used to convict a Virginia man of a 2019 bank robbery, they conducted a “search” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. By a vote of 6-3, the justices sent Okello Chatrie’s case back to the lower court for it to consider whether, as the Fourth Amendment requires, the search was “reasonable.”

Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan emphasized that “[a]n individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his cell phone’s location, and police intrude on that constitutionally protected interest when they demand the information—even though for only a limited time, and from a third-party tech company.”

Justice Samuel Alito, in a dissenting opinion joined in part by Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett, contended that the majority’s opinion “will send seismic waves through our Fourth Amendment doctrine” but would ultimately not have any effect on Chatrie’s case.

The issue at the center of Chatrie v. United States arose after a man armed with a gun entered a federal credit union outside Richmond, Virginia, and gave the teller a note demanding money. He made off with nearly $200,000, but law enforcement officials did not have any leads until they served Google with a geofence warrant, which directed the tech company to provide location data for cellphone users who were near the bank at the time of the robbery.

The information that Google provided to law enforcement officials came in three tranches. First, Google gave law enforcement officials a list of the 19 accounts (but without the names attached to those accounts) linked to devices that were within 150 meters of the bank during the 30 minutes before and after the robbery. Second, based on that list of 19 accounts, the government asked for additional information about nine accounts that were in the area during a two-hour period. At the third step, a detective asked for, and received, the names and information associated with three accounts – one of which was Chatrie’s.

Relying on the location data, law enforcement officials obtained a warrant to search two residences linked to Chatrie, where they found almost $100,000 of the stolen cash, a gun, and demand notes.

Prosecutors charged Chatrie with bank robbery. He asked the trial judge to bar prosecutors from using the evidence obtained as a result of the geofence warrant at his trial, arguing that the warrant violated the Fourth Amendment.

A federal district judge agreed that the warrant in Chatrie’s case did not have the kind of probable cause and specificity that the Fourth Amendment requires. However, she nonetheless allowed the prosecutors to use the evidence, reasoning that even if there had been a violation of the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement officials had acted in good faith.

Chatrie pleaded guilty to bank robbery, although he retained his right to appeal the district court’s ruling allowing prosecutors to use the evidence obtained through the geofence warrant. He was sentenced to nearly 12 years in prison, followed by three years of supervised release. # id) ?>
Posted by NN2N1 2026-07-09 00:00|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [2541 views ]  Top

1 
In case you are new to hearing about GEOFENCE and its abilities.

It basically belittles FLOCK Tracking by many times over, and much deeper into personal privacy issues. The government argued that because you shared your whereabouts with Google voluntarily, you also gave up any expectation of privacy of that data. Now! Think of all the data elements you pass thru Google, like SMS Texting, Email, Location & your travels, various Web searches, your AI questions and more each day. Has Big Gov already flagged you as a threat to, say the Socialists & Democrats if they steal power again?

Plus a GEOFENCE warrant was a Blanket Wide area request.
It literally covers data from 100's to 1000's of Google tracked phones and devices in a given area. Violating the rights of 1000's to find 1 POS. Example Given: Jan 6th protests GEOFENCE was used to ID every one carrying a active communication device. Thus allowing massive arrests or ongoing surveillance of persons that opposed the Democrat Coup stealing the election.
Posted by NN2N1 2026-07-09 04:05||   2026-07-09 04:05|| Front Page Top

2 That ruling could be a good protection of our rights unless there is something like a FISA Court that just rubber stamps all surveillance requests.
Posted by Super Hose 2026-07-09 11:23||   2026-07-09 11:23|| Front Page Top

15:51 DarthVader
15:32 NoMoreBS
14:32 badanov
14:26 Silentbrick
14:10  chris
14:06 Skidmark
13:48 Bugs the Wicked6167
13:15 badanov
13:09 DarthVader
12:57 Grom the Reflective
12:06 Grom the Reflective
11:57 Bobby
11:55 Grom the Reflective
10:47 DarthVader
10:39 Silentbrick
10:14 Bobby
10:13 badanov
10:00 Snesing Schwarzeneggar8998
09:58 Besoeker
09:45 Bobby
09:34 Warthog
09:22 Besoeker
09:17 Mercutio
09:13 Glenmore
Merry-Go-Blog










Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com