Commonwealth v. Arthur
62 A.3d 424
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Commonwealth appeals a March 16, 2012 suppression order reversing the GPS results against Arthur, Thompson, and Ladson-Singleton.
- In March 2011, informants alleged Arthur sold drugs in Norristown; a controlled buy occurred and Arthur drove a blue Ford Taurus (PA plate HSD-8740) to the meeting and returned to a Stanbridge Street address.
- Detective Fedak sought and obtained a §5761 Wiretap Act order to place a GPS on the Taurus; GPS installed March 16, 2011.
- A second controlled buy in late March 2011 used the same vehicle; GPS data supported warrants for the Stanbridge Street and Sandy Street residences and the Taurus.
- March 24, 2011 searches yielded marijuana, drug paraphernalia, firearms, cash, and Thompson present at Sandy Street; Ladson-Singleton was at Stanbridge Street; charges included conspiracy and firearms/drug offenses.
- The suppression court granted the laws to suppress; Commonwealth timely appealed, challenging Jones-based suppression and potential good-faith exceptions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether GPS use violated the Fourth Amendment under Jones given §5761 compliance | Arthur/Thompson relied on Jones to suppress | Commonwealth argues Jones not controlling; §5761 valid | GPS use not unconstitutional under Jones when §5761 compliance is satisfied |
| Whether Thompson had standing/privacy interest to challenge the search | Thompson had vehicle access/ownership through co-conspirator | Thompson lacked ownership or control over the vehicle | Thompson lacked standing; suppression reversed as to Thompson |
| Whether Arthur had standing/privacy interest in the vehicle or if probable cause supported the warrant | Arthur had possessory/ownership interest | Arthur lacked standing or privacy interest; probable cause supports warrants | Arthur lacked standing; even if had interest, Jones not controlling; probable cause supported warrants; suppression reversed as to Arthur |
| Whether the case should recognize a good-faith exception under §5761 | N/A | N/A | Not addressed due to disposition (reversal/remand) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Burton, 973 A.2d 428 (Pa. Super. 2009) (standing and expectation of privacy analysis for suppressions)
- Commonwealth v. Maldonado, 14 A.3d 907 (Pa. Super. 2011) (non-owners must show permission to drive vehicle to establish privacy)
- Commonwealth v. Caban, 60 A.3d 120 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standing/privacy for non-owners in vehicle searches)
- Commonwealth v. Powell, 994 A.2d 1096 (Pa. Super. 2010) (no privacy in vehicle owned by third party with no permission)
- Commonwealth v. Huntington, 924 A.2d 1252 (Pa. Super. 2007) (probable cause standard for warrants under totality of circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Gray, 503 A.2d 921 (Pa. 1985) (probable cause/automatic standing principles and privacy)
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) (GPS on private vehicle constitutes a search under Fourth Amendment)