NY Court Says Police Can't Track Suspect With GPS

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."

Comments

defense approach difference?

[d3ac0n]

What is not noted in TFM is what the defense approach was. On what grounds did they protest the use of GPS tracking? Add to that the potential variances in state law and it's not shocking that we might get an opposite conclusion.

Of course, IANAL, so I could we way off here. Is NY Country Lawyer around to answer this one?

Re:Did he still steal stuff?

[d3ac0n]

From my basic understanding of the US legal system, evidence obtained improperly is considered tainted and suspect, and is thus thrown out.

Think of it this way; If the police officer in question is willing to collect evidence in a manner contrary to procedure and law, it is entirely likely that he is willing to plant or forge evidence to get a conviction.

Remember: In America, it's still "Innocent until proven guilty." no matter what one advocacy group or another might say. While I hate for a burglar to go free, we cannot assume that the defendant in this case was indeed a burglar just because the police say so. Nor can we assume the evidence wasn't forged in some manner if the police weren't even willing to follow procedure.

The judges did the right thing in tossing out the evidence, IMHO.

Re:What's Good for the Goose

[d3ac0n]

But I wonder how police officers would react if GPS devices were surreptitiously placed on their cruisers.

I was under the impression that police cruisers in most (if not all) locales in the US have been equipped with GPS tracking for many years now. I know for a fact that the NY State trooper vehicles have them (I have an in-law who's a trooper) and I think my local township does too. From what my in-law told me, the troopers union requested the GPS devices for officer safety reasons.

Re:That is a 1960's liberal mistake.

[ppanon]

Perhaps if police weren't allowed to have an IQ cap and instead hired the brightest applicants instead of deliberately weeding them out, then they would have more success catching the 10 criminals on your block and could do it without breaking the law themselves.

Re:That is a 1960's liberal mistake.

[tjstork]

I've seen many Republicans like you, providing no evidence to support their positions, just spouting lame garbage. Often people like you will even sound sensible on the surface, but then ten seconds of critical thought later, your arguments are exposed for the lies and hypocrisy they truly are.

This is just name calling. Nothing more, nothing less.

I pity you, for seeing the world through such a distorted view must make your life incredibly miserable.

Blah blah blah more name calling. I don't pity liberals at all. Things that are not human are not worth pity.

And, to top it off, you lied, as usual for a lib

[tjstork]

The application of anecdotal fallacy is incorrect. A rhetorical statement about letting ten men go free was made, and I replied with a rhetorical statement.

Besides, since when do anecdotal fallacies ever stop liberals..... the whole art of liberal protest is to find some shmoe who is willing to lie about about their circumstances or inflate them for a bit of tv time...

and of course you argue that appeal to tradition is wrong. of course, just wait till people start making fun of liberal traditions.