GPS: What’s A Hardworking Robber To Do In This Electronic Age?

A victim of a robbery had a smart phone in her stolen handbag. The police located the phone at a particular intersection by “pinging” the phone’s GPS system, which the victim and owner of the cell phone authorized the police to do. Defendant was arrested within 45 minutes of the robbery. He challenged the legality of the initial stop. The courts considered whether or not defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy and concluded it was only the cell phone owner who legitimately had such a claim. The appellate court noted that a 1998 statute, Penal Code section 637.7, subdivisions (a) and (b), is instructive.  That statute states: “No person or entity in this state shall use an electronic tracking device to determine the location or movement of a person,” but then also provides, “This section shall not apply when the registered owner, lesser, or lessee of a vehicle has consented to the use of the electronic tracking device with respect to that vehicle.” The appellate court concluded:  “Accordingly, we conclude that the use of GPS technology in ascertaining the location of the stolen cell phone, and thus, assisting in the locating of defendant was no violation of the Fourth Amendment.” People v. Barnes (Cal. App. First Dist., Div. 1; June 11, 2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 1508, [157 Cal.Rptr.3d 853].