Abstract
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. As technology advances, the extent of individual rights are debated and applied to new circumstances. One such technological innovation, global positioning systems (GPS), as utilized by various law enforcement agencies, goes to the heart of Fourth Amendment issues. In looking at the use of GPS devices to track individuals, courts must ask whether the use of such a device constitutes a search and also whether long-term GPS tracking violates individuals’ right to privacy. This Note specifically examines the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals case of United States v. Maynard. In Maynard, the court found that warrantless, prolonged GPS tracking of an individual’s vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment; and also, the court found that the individual had a right to privacy in the aggregate of his vehicular movements over the course of a month. In analyzing the D.C. Circuit Court’s opinion, this Note looks to Supreme Court precedent, namely United States v. Knotts, to reach the conclusion that the D.C. Circuit Court erred in their decision. Knotts supplies the key precedent that “[a] person traveling in an automobile on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements from one place to another.” Furthermore, this Note considers the expectation of privacy in Maynard in light of other Supreme Court cases, and it briefly discusses the idea of societal acknowledgment of a privacy right.
Recommended Citation
Tim Shrake,
It’s Like Tailing Your Vehicle for a Month: An Analysis of the Warrantless Use of a Global Positioning System in United States v. Maynard, 615 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2010),
36
S. Ill. U. L.J.
205
(2011).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol36/iss1/8