Commonwealth v. Lepage, 494 Mass. 67

Brandyn Lepage was convicted of first-degree felony murder for the 2012 shooting death of Aja Pascual in Fall River, Massachusetts.
The investigation involved obtaining Lepage’s cell phone call detail records, historical cell site location information (CSLI), and ping data from T-Mobile without a warrant, under exigent circumstances.
Lepage argued these records were obtained illegally, that police used them to develop the case against him, and that the Commonwealth concealed their use.
The case merged Lepage's direct appeal of the murder conviction and his appeal from the denial of a new trial, focusing on whether the evidence from the cell phone records should be suppressed and if the Commonwealth violated due process.
The motion judge found the police did not use CSLI or ping data to build the case or track Lepage, relying mostly on witness interviews and other evidence.
The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed Lepage’s conviction and denial of a new trial, but vacated his unlawful possession of a firearm conviction due to procedural error in that charge.

Issue	Plaintiff’s Argument	Defendant’s Argument	Held
Warrantless acquisition of call detail records	Lepage: Violated reasonable expectation of privacy; SCA creates such expectation	Commonwealth: No expectation of privacy; records are business records	No warrant or privacy expectation; no suppression required
Use of CSLI and ping data in investigation	Police used illegally obtained location evidence to develop the case and arrest Lepage	Police did not use CSLI or ping data to further investigation	Motion judge credited police; CSLI/ping data not used, error (if any) harmless
Due process—failure to disclose exculpatory evidence	Prosecutors concealed use of location data, violating Brady / art. 12 disclosure duties	All relevant records were produced; no concealment or exculpatory evidence	No due process violation; nothing material withheld
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel failed to investigate police use of CSLI/ping data; prejudiced Lepage	No material error; investigation would not affect verdict	No error; no substantial likelihood of miscarriage

Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) (no reasonable expectation of privacy in numbers dialed, foundational for third-party doctrine)
Commonwealth v. Augustine, 467 Mass. 230 (2014) (found that CSLI is not subject to the third-party doctrine, but call detail records are)
Commonwealth v. Cote, 407 Mass. 827 (1990) (reaffirmed third-party doctrine in Massachusetts phone records)
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) (seminal case defining “reasonable expectation of privacy”)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecutorial duty to disclose exculpatory evidence)
Commonwealth v. Schand, 420 Mass. 783 (1995) (defendant must establish existence of exculpatory evidence for new trial)