United States v. Walker
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13760
W.D. Mich.2011Background
- UPSET learned of Walker in July 2009 from tips, conducted four controlled crack buys, and placed Guardian 811 GPS on Walker's vehicle on four separate occasions in public parking areas.
- GPS used to track movement with fence alerts; live tracking was limited due to battery life; officers relied on public-road movements to infer activity.
- On July 27, 2010, officers observed a Chicago-bound trip via GPS fence crossing and obtained warrants to search Walker's vehicle and apartment.
- Evidence from vehicle search (two ounces crack cocaine) and apartment search (scales, packaging) followed after stops and Miranda waiver.
- Walker moved to suppress, arguing the GPS placement/monitoring was an unlawful Fourth Amendment search; Magistrate Judge recommended denial; District Court adopted that recommendation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether warrantless GPS monitoring was a Fourth Amendment search | Walker argues it was a search. | Walker contends GPS monitoring violated privacy. | No Fourth Amendment search; Knotts/Karo applied. |
| Whether GPS installation constituted an unlawful seizure of the vehicle | Walker claims seizure via device attachment. | Walker asserts a trespass-like seizure. | Not a Fourth Amendment seizure; attachment amounted to no meaningful interference. |
| Whether the First Amendment chilling effect was raised and preserved | Walker asserts chilling effect on First Amendment rights. | Chilling effect not properly raised or supported. | Waived; rejected on merits if reached. |
| Whether live-tracking technology changes the Fourth Amendment analysis | Live tracking could reveal privacy interests. | Technology should raise heightened scrutiny. | GPS use here did not reveal protected private information; no additional scrutiny required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) (what a person exposes to the public is not protected)
- Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) (tracking a vehicle on public roads is not a search)
- United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (1984) (beeper on containers; monitoring inside residence may raise issues)
- California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986) (overhead surveillance of curtilage not a search)
- Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) (aerial surveillance not a search when not intruding into protected area)