385 F. Supp. 3d 648
E.D. Ill.2019Background
- On March 17, 2017 Razny Jewelers in Hinsdale, IL was robbed; detectives identified a 2003 Lexus RX (registered to Devinn Adams) as the getaway vehicle and associated it with defendant Diggs, who regularly drove the car.
- A Headers Car Care employee (the seller/servicer) told police the Lexus had an Air Assault GPS tracking service and provided the detective login credentials, authorizing access to the account.
- Without a warrant, a Hinsdale detective downloaded ~one month (March 1–April 4, 2017) of historical GPS data showing timestamped location points for the Lexus; the data placed the Lexus near the jewelry store during the robbery and showed movements linking defendants' residences.
- Diggs moved to suppress the GPS data as a Fourth Amendment violation; the government argued no search occurred (no physical trespass), invoked the third-party doctrine, and alternatively invoked the good-faith exception to exclusion.
- The court concluded the warrantless acquisition of the long-term historical GPS data was a Fourth Amendment search and unreasonable; suppression was granted, and the court rejected the government’s good-faith/Davis argument.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether obtaining month-long historical GPS data from a third party was a Fourth Amendment search | Diggs: long-term, high‑precision GPS records create a comprehensive, retrospective chronicle of movements and implicate a reasonable expectation of privacy (Jones/Carpenter). | Gov't: no physical trespass; third‑party doctrine means no expectation of privacy in data turned over to Headers. | The acquisition was a search; Carpenter and Jones principles apply—long‑term historical GPS data implicate privacy and are protected. |
| Whether the third‑party doctrine permits warrantless collection of this GPS data | Diggs: Carpenter forecloses extending Smith/Miller to comprehensive location dossiers; the user did not meaningfully consent to long‑term tracking. | Gov't: pre‑Carpenter precedent (including Caira and other circuits) supported treating third‑party location records as unprotected. | Carpenter controls: third‑party doctrine does not authorize warrantless collection of exhaustive, historical location data; Diggs had a reasonable expectation of privacy. |
| Whether the good‑faith exception (Davis) saves the evidence | Diggs: no binding Seventh Circuit precedent specifically authorizing this practice existed; out‑of‑circuit authority not binding. | Gov't: officers reasonably relied on pre‑Carpenter appellate decisions (Caira, Graham, Sixth Circuit Carpenter) applying the third‑party doctrine. | Rejected: no binding Seventh Circuit precedent authorized collecting long‑term GPS records; out‑of‑circuit cases are not binding for Davis; exclusionary rule applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) (physical intrusion and long‑term GPS monitoring implicate Fourth Amendment privacy concerns)
- Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) (warrantless acquisition of historical location records from third party is a search; third‑party doctrine does not automatically apply)
- Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) (pen‑register third‑party doctrine origin)
- United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976) (bank records and third‑party doctrine)
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (2011) (good‑faith exception when officers rely on binding appellate precedent)
- United States v. Caira, 833 F.3d 803 (7th Cir. 2016) (application of third‑party doctrine to IP‑address records; distinguished from long‑term GPS tracking)
- United States v. Correa, 908 F.3d 208 (7th Cir. 2018) (framework for trespass and privacy expectation analyses under Fourth Amendment)