Fifth Circuit Holds that Geofence Warrants are Unconstitutional

Technological advances and the near-universal use of cell phones have given law enforcement personnel new tools when they investigate potential criminal suspects. Some of these tactics might cross the line when it comes to Fourth Amendment protections, however. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which covers Texas and other states, issued a decision stopping authorities from using broad warrants demanding information from tech companies about every person that was in a given area at a certain time. 

In U.S. v. Jamarr Smith, et al, three men convicted of robbery appealed on the ground that they were identified through what is referred to as a “geofence warrant.” Unlike a traditional warrant, which requires probable cause to search a specific individual or location, a geofence warrant does not link any particular person to the alleged criminal activity. Rather, these warrants compel companies that collect identifying data from cell phones to list all recognized devices that fall within given parameters. Once businesses such as Google provide this location data, investigators can analyze it to find potential suspects.

The problem lies in the vast scope of data collected under a geofence warrant. In essence, these warrants allow the government to gather information on potentially hundreds or thousands of individuals, including those with no connection to the crime under investigation. In the Smith case, the Fifth Circuit panel found that geofence warrants are inherently unconstitutional because they collect data on a large number of individuals regardless of any suspicion or evidence linking them to a crime. In doing so, the court determined that geofence warrants lack the specificity required to avoid an unreasonable invasion of privacy.

Moreover, location data can reveal sensitive information about an individual’s movements, routines and private life. By gathering location data on all individuals within a given area, law enforcement agencies have access to a mother lode of information having nothing to do with the alleged offense they are investigating. 

While law enforcement agencies continue to conduct digital investigations, the Smith decision should lead them to draft more narrowly tailored warrants supported by probable cause for specific individuals or devices. As the legal landscape shifts regarding geofence warrants and similar police tactics, an experienced defense attorney can advise if authorities violated your rights while investigating criminal misconduct.  

Tylden Shaeffer, Attorney at Law, P.C. in San Antonio provides comprehensive criminal defense representation for Texas clients. To schedule a free consultation, please call (210) 227-1500 or contact me online. 

By Tylden Shaeffer | Published December 21, 2024 | Posted in Search and Seizure | Tagged Fourth Amendment, Geofence, privacy