Cell-Site Location Data (Phone Location Records)
Rulings about police getting phone location records from carriers or tech companies, and when a warrant is required. Summaries from Criminal Defense Resources™ are general education for pro per/pro se defendants and families, not legal advice.
6 rulings, newest first.
Chatrie v. United States
The Court held that police conducted a Fourth Amendment search when they obtained a person's Google Location History data through a geofence warrant, because people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their cell-phone location information. The Court did not decide whether this particular multi-step warrant was valid; it vacated the Fourth Circuit's decision and sent the case back for that court to decide.
Carpenter v. United States
The Court held that when the government obtains a person's historical cell-site location records from a phone company, that is a Fourth Amendment search, and police generally need a warrant.
United States v. Graham
The full Fourth Circuit held that the government's acquisition of historical cell-site records from a phone company was not a Fourth Amendment search, applying the third-party doctrine.
United States v. Davis
The full Eleventh Circuit held that obtaining historical cell-site records from a phone company with a court order under the Stored Communications Act, rather than a warrant, did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Commonwealth v. Augustine
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that under the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, the government must get a search warrant based on probable cause before obtaining two weeks of a person's historical cell-site location information from a phone company.
State v. Earls
The New Jersey Supreme Court held that under the New Jersey Constitution, police must generally get a warrant before obtaining cell-phone location information from a service provider.
Get new rulings by email
A short, free email when we add new rulings and resources. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.