Commonwealth v. Augustine
472 Mass. 448
| Mass. | 2015Background
- In 2004, Julaine Jules disappeared after leaving work; her car was found burned in Revere and her body was later recovered from the Charles River. Investigation focused on defendant Shabazz Augustine.
- Police obtained historical cell site location information (CSLI) for Augustine for a 14-day period beginning August 24, 2004, pursuant to an order under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d).
- Augustine was indicted for murder in 2011 and moved to suppress CSLI evidence, arguing Fourth Amendment and art. 14 violations; the Superior Court initially suppressed the CSLI under art. 14.
- This court in Augustine I held there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in historical CSLI under art. 14 and remanded to determine whether the § 2703(d) affidavit established probable cause for the CSLI.
- On remand the motion judge again suppressed; on interlocutory review this court reviewed the four-corners of Trooper McCauley’s affidavit (facts: calls/timing, defendant’s inconsistent statements, voicemail, movements after the fire) and reversed, finding probable cause to obtain CSLI for Aug. 24–26, 2004.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether art. 14 requires probable cause for historical CSLI | Commonwealth: affidavit shows CSLI relevant to investigation and § 2703(d) order was proper | Augustine: art. 14 requires a warrant/probable cause and CSLI obtained without meeting that standard must be suppressed | Court (Augustine I + this opinion): art. 14 applies; probable cause required and here it was met for Aug. 24–26, 2004 |
| Whether the § 2703(d) affidavit established probable cause that CSLI would produce evidence of the crimes | McCauley affidavit: timing, phone records, defendant’s inconsistencies, voicemail, movements plausibly link defendant to arson and murder | Augustine: affidavit insufficient—doesn’t show substantial basis that CSLI will yield evidence; motion judge erred in finding probable cause | Held: affidavit, read as a whole, supplied probable cause that CSLI would likely produce evidence of arson and related murder for the specified period |
| Scope of permissible CSLI (time period) | Commonwealth: use only CSLI covered by the original § 2703(d) order (14 days) | Augustine: broader suppression or challenge to scope because order was issued under lesser § 2703(d) standard | Held: Court limited relief to CSLI covered by the original 14-day order; probable cause exists for Aug. 24–26, 2004 |
| Standard of review for probable cause on affidavit | Commonwealth: de novo review of affidavit required | Augustine: deference to motion judge’s factual inferences | Held: probable cause is a legal conclusion; court reviews affidavit de novo but considers commonsense inferences; here de novo review finds probable cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Augustine, 467 Mass. 230 (2014) (held historical CSLI implicates a reasonable expectation of privacy under art. 14)
- Commonwealth v. Connolly, 454 Mass. 808 (2009) (probable cause standard for warrants described)
- Commonwealth v. Banville, 457 Mass. 530 (2010) (test for substantial basis linking items sought to criminal activity)
- Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 Mass. 363 (1985) (probable cause requires substantial basis to believe items sought related to crime)
- Commonwealth v. Gentile, 437 Mass. 569 (2002) (fact that defendant was last seen with victim supports probable cause)
- Commonwealth v. Kaupp, 453 Mass. 102 (2009) (example of insufficient evidence to support probable cause)