http://ow.ly/70JZs
An article on the EDD Update blog posted by "Engel".
This article discusses Ohio's law enforcement efforts to use tracking information generated by technology such as cell phones and GPS. The article provides a link to an opinion in 2009 that rejected Ohio's law enforcement efforts to search cell phones after an arrest.
This article focuses primarily on the case State v. Sullivan, in which officers placed a GPS device on a car that was suspected of use in a string of burglaries. The article states, "The court held that the warrantless placement of the GPS device was prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. Notably, in reaching this opinion, the court relied upon a general “right of privacy guaranteed to the citizens of this nation” and cited, among other decisions, Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)."
The article further states, "The initial placement of the GPS tracking device but also its attachment during the entire period of its use implicates Fourth Amendment interests of the privacy rights of persons."
P.S. The U.S. Supreme Court is stated to soon be making an opinion on this same issue, and we will see if they agree with the Ohio appeals court..
0 comments:
Post a Comment