State v. White
2011 Ohio 4526
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Franklin County detectives investigated a series of home invasions in early 2010 with similarities including firearms, suburban/rural locations, and two African-American males described in a white car.
- AAA identified a white Honda Civic involved in service calls; the vehicle was linked to co-defendant Sullivan, whose address matched a surveillance target.
- Corporal Minerd used a data-base of associates to tie Sullivan and White to the Hudson Bay Way address and to prior traffic activity in the white Honda Civic.
- Detectives conducted three days of surveillance on the Hudson Bay Way address and the Civic before obtaining permission to place a GPS device on the vehicle without a warrant.
- On January 23, 2010, GPS monitoring began under the bumper of the vehicle, providing real-time location data and movement history without prior judicial authorization.
- The movements tracked led to a Bickel Church Road home invasion; law enforcement recovered stolen property and arrested White and Sullivan.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether attaching a GPS device without a warrant violated Fourth Amendment privacy | White | White | GPS attachment without a warrant is a search; requires warrant |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johnson, 190 Ohio App.3d 750 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010) (GPS issues in Ohio, initial placement and monitoring discussed)
- United States v. Bailey, 628 F.2d 938 (6th Cir. 1980) (two groups of GPS monitoring cases; privacy expectations depend on context)
- United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1983) (no reasonable expectation of privacy for movements on public roads in certain contexts)
- United States v. Maynard, 615 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (long-term GPS surveillance raises privacy concerns; warrant may be required)
- Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1967) (wiretap-like surveillance requires probable cause and timely oversight)
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1967) (reasonable expectation of privacy framework)
- Osborn v. United States, 385 U.S. 323 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1966) (privacy protections in the digital/technological era warrant careful constitutional scrutiny)
- United States v. Michael, 622 F.2d 744 (5th Cir. 1980) (discusses breadth and limits of GPS-type surveillance)