In re Telephone Info (Koh)
A federal magistrate judge in San Jose, California denied a government request for historical cell site records, ordering the government to seek a search warrant for the information. The government appealed this order to U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh who requested the Federal Public Defender argue why the Fourth Amendment would require law enforcement use a search warrant to obtain this information. EFF filed an amicus brief supporting the Federal Public Defender and explaining as an increasing number of state courts and legislatures adopt a warrant requirement for cell site records, the expectation that these records remain private is necessarily reasonable. Our brief also explained the warrant requirement is particularly important in California where the state Supreme Court rejected the so-called “third party doctrine,” the idea that you lose an expectation of privacy over records shared with a third party, more than thirty years ago. Instead, the state constitution protects telephone records with an expectation of privacy.
In July 2015, Judge Koh agreed with us and found the Fourth Amendment protected historical cell site records and required law enforcement use a warrant to obtain these records.
Related Content
-
-
-
-
Did you just buy a shiny new smartphone loaded with the newest and greatest features to have conversations throughout the day, wherever you are? While your phone’s capabilities are distinctly modern, a new decision in United States v. Davis allowing police to get without a warrant records of...
-
-
Last year, the highest court in Massachusetts, the Supreme Judicial Court, issued a landmark decision in Commonwealth v. Augustine, requiring police in the state to get a search warrant before they can track individuals’ past movements using information from their cell phones. It was a significant victory for...
-
-
-
Once again, a federal court will decide whether police can track your movements over an extended period of time without a search warrant. Federal and state courts have divided over whether the Fourth Amendment requires police seek a search warrant to obtain historical cell site location information (CSLI)—the records of...
-
The Fourth Amendment protects us from “unreasonable” government searches of our persons, houses, papers and effects. How courts should determine what is and isn’t reasonable in our increasingly digital world is the subject of a new amicus brief we filed today in San Francisco federal court.
...
Pages