Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Federal Judge throws out cell phone "stingray" evidence for lack of warrant

  1. #1
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795

    Federal Judge throws out cell phone "stingray" evidence for lack of warrant

    As found on Drudge today, this Reuters article reports on a decision by a federal judge in NYC.

    A fair use excerpt:

    Quote Originally Posted by Reuters

    ... a federal judge has suppressed evidence obtained without a warrant by U.S. law enforcement using a stingray, a surveillance device that can trick suspects' cell phones into revealing their locations.

    U.S. District Judge William Pauley in Manhattan on Tuesday ruled that defendant Raymond Lambis' rights were violated when the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration used such a device without a warrant to find his Washington Heights apartment.

    ...

    "Absent a search warrant, the government may not turn a citizen's cell phone into a tracking device," Pauley wrote.
    ...
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  2. #2
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,619
    Unfortunately no value beyond that court/district.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    True, but a milestone to the Fourth Amendment community, and seen/covered by the national media.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    That contradicts with the recent ruling saying that the government agents can search your computer without a warrant if it is connected to the www or the internet. The reason given is that it was okay because, hackers do it all the time.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Freedom1Man; 07-14-2016 at 08:15 AM.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Unfortunately no value beyond that court/district.
    Always able to cite it .. for what that's worth.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Always able to cite it .. for what that's worth.
    ... nothing, no value outside the jurisdiction of the court.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    ... nothing, no value outside the jurisdiction of the court.
    Better than nothing ....

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    ... nothing, no value outside the jurisdiction of the court.
    Well, yes.

    They do throw us a tiny bone every once in a while--after taking away four times as much as they then "preserve."

    "Oh, thank you, master, thank you! May I please have another crumb?"
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    True, but a milestone to the Fourth Amendment community, and seen/covered by the national media.
    Like I said ...
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  10. #10
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    True, it isn't binding on any other circuit/district BUT, it certainly may be used as guidance by another circuit/district in making that courts ruling---- Certainly better than ruling the evidence gathered without the warrant was eligible for full use against the accused.
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    As found on Drudge today, this Reuters article reports on a decision by a federal judge in NYC.

    A fair use excerpt:
    This will surely be overturned, think l'license plates".. police run citizens plates constantly to gather information without the use of a warrant, same principle will apply in this case... Also if the average citizen can track another citizen via this method, logic would dictate that the Government is entitled to do the same.. A citizens address is not constitutionally protected, there is also no privacy rights violated by the G...

    While I do in fact hope that I am incorrect on this issue, logic would dictate that I am correct.

    See Olmstead v United States

    My .02
    Regards
    CCJ
    Last edited by countryclubjoe; 07-15-2016 at 10:29 PM. Reason: cite
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    This will surely be overturned, think l'license plates".. police run citizens plates constantly to gather information without the use of a warrant, same principle will apply in this case... Also if the average citizen can track another citizen via this method, logic would dictate that the Government is entitled to do the same.. A citizens address is not constitutionally protected, there is also no privacy rights violated by the G...

    While I do in fact hope that I am incorrect on this issue, logic would dictate that I am correct.

    See Olmstead v United States

    My .02
    Regards
    CCJ
    Read the drivers privacy act (linked below) and you may come to the same conclusion that I have ... running plates is prohibited via the fishing expeditions that they do now.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2721


    A person maybe able able to track a car just from noticing the plate # but cannot get any personal info normally, with the exceptions noted in the federal law.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Read the drivers privacy act (linked below) and you may come to the same conclusion that I have ... running plates is prohibited via the fishing expeditions that they do now.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2721


    A person maybe able able to track a car just from noticing the plate # but cannot get any personal info normally, with the exceptions noted in the federal law.
    Great post, however the states violate this federal law everyday and the local kangaroo courts(traffic court) municipial courts, judges and attorney's along with the state DMV violate this federal statute each and everyday... The states compel its citizens to use license plates as part of owning and operating an automobile on the state highways, David, the state and the DMV is not concerned with the privacy rights of its citizens... I know plenty of PI that can obtain any citizens information if they need too.. The state and DMV are only concerned with revenue, they prey on unsuspecting citizens, citizens that blindly or out of fear consent to surrendering their rights for a privilege..

    If a citizens puts a license plate tag on his or her automobile then that citizen unbeknown to said citizen is putting his/her personal information, name, address etc.. in full view to the general public therefore citizen has no privacy rights... Think of the "plain view" doctrine for a better understanding of this theory.. There is also case law to support this theory however i am away from my law library at the moment..

    See Olmstead V United States-- To wit

    The common law rule is that the admissibility of evidence is not affected by the illegality of the means by which it was obtained...

    Keep in mind that Government officials do not need to be nice and ethical in obtaining evidence... They do it all the time... Hence my reasoning for thinking that this ruling by the federal judge in NYC will in fact be over turned..

    My .02
    Best regards
    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    True, it isn't binding on any other circuit/district BUT, it certainly may be used as guidance by another circuit/district in making that courts ruling---- Certainly better than ruling the evidence gathered without the warrant was eligible for full use against the accused.
    Exactly. Or, if other circuits/districts rule differently, this ruling provides the split that tends to motivate the SCOTUS to look at cases more than if the lower courts are in agreement.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    Great post, however the states violate this federal law everyday and the local kangaroo courts(traffic court) municipial courts, judges and attorney's along with the state DMV violate this federal statute each and everyday... The states compel its citizens to use license plates as part of owning and operating an automobile on the state highways, David, the state and the DMV is not concerned with the privacy rights of its citizens... I know plenty of PI that can obtain any citizens information if they need too.. The state and DMV are only concerned with revenue, they prey on unsuspecting citizens, citizens that blindly or out of fear consent to surrendering their rights for a privilege..

    If a citizens puts a license plate tag on his or her automobile then that citizen unbeknown to said citizen is putting his/her personal information, name, address etc.. in full view to the general public therefore citizen has no privacy rights... Think of the "plain view" doctrine for a better understanding of this theory.. There is also case law to support this theory however i am away from my law library at the moment..

    See Olmstead V United States-- To wit

    The common law rule is that the admissibility of evidence is not affected by the illegality of the means by which it was obtained...

    Keep in mind that Government officials do not need to be nice and ethical in obtaining evidence... They do it all the time... Hence my reasoning for thinking that this ruling by the federal judge in NYC will in fact be over turned..

    My .02
    Best regards
    CCJ
    Found this recent case

    courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=243430

    In Delaware ... looks like cop just runs plates for kicks it appears and got a hit. Of course, DMV provided info to the police w/o it being part of an actual investigation.

    The state blessed this fishing expedition.

    Laws only apply to us when it comes down to it....

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Found this recent case

    courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=243430

    In Delaware ... looks like cop just runs plates for kicks it appears and got a hit. Of course, DMV provided info to the police w/o it being part of an actual investigation.

    The state blessed this fishing expedition.

    Laws only apply to us when it comes down to it....
    The second a citizen complies with the state and attaches a license plate on his/her property(automobile) said citizen is giving the state and DMV and any LEO the authority to ID the citizen and or do a fishing expedition without probable cause, without RAS and without a warrant..
    The state relies on the compliance of the ignorant to survive, quasi traffic laws/statutes are a big business.. Most people comply out of ignorance and the remaining comply out of fear...
    Regards
    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    The second a citizen complies with the state and attaches a license plate on his/her property(automobile) said citizen is giving the state and DMV and any LEO the authority to ID the citizen and or do a fishing expedition without probable cause, without RAS and without a warrant..
    The state relies on the compliance of the ignorant to survive, quasi traffic laws/statutes are a big business.. Most people comply out of ignorance and the remaining comply out of fear...
    Regards
    CCJ
    Ignore 4th amendment and, on top of that, the Driver's Privacy Protection Act? That's crazy.

    Patsy Cline Crazy ... linked below for those non-lizzurds so inclined ...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QEDb3xzdec

    And for those lizzurds, a link below....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tPnX7OPo0Q

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •