No Warrant to use GPS to Track Suspect

Attaching a global positioning device on a car to track the suspect’s movements without a warrant does not constitute an unlawful search, the Seventh Circuit has found.

However, if the government someday institutes a program of mass surveillance of vehicular movements, then the Court said it would “decide whether the Fourth Amendment should be interpreted to treat such surveillance as a search.”

The court affirmed the conviction of Bernardo Garcia for crimes relating to the manufacture of methamphetamine. His conviction was the result of the police placing a GPS device underneath the bumper of his car while it was parked on a public street. The device received and stored satellite signals that indicated the device’s location. The police used the collected data to tract Garcia’s movements to a large tract of land where they found equipment and materials used in the manufacture of meth. As it so happened, while the police were on the tract, the defendant drove up and the police searched the car finding additional evidence. The police had not obtained a warrant authorizing them to place the GPS tracker on the defendant’s car.

The Fourth Amendment forbids unreasonable searches and seizures. Judge Posner wrote that if a listening device is attached to a person’s phone–or the phone line outside the premises–and the conversations are recorded, there is a search and a warrant is required. “But if the police follow a car around, or observe its route by means of cameras mounted on lampposts or of satellite imaging as in Google Earth, there is no search,” Judge Posner reasoned.

“Instead of transmitting images, the satellite transmitted geophysical coordinates. The only difference is that in the imaging case nothing touches the vehicle, while in the case at hand the tracking device does. But it is a distinction without any practical difference.” Since following a car on a public street is not a search, neither is using a GPS device, the court said. However, if the government decided to engage in a program of “mass surveillance” using GPS, then the court could revisit the issue at that time, Judge Posner wrote.

United States of America v. Bernardo Garcia, Seventh Cir. No. 06-2741, February 2, 2007.