United States v. Wilford
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80898
D. Maryland2013Background
- April 2011 seizure of cocaine valued over $13 million; federal indictment of six Hayes DTO members in Baltimore area.
- Wilford charged May 5, 2011 with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine.
- Investigation relied on GPS tracking and cell phone pinging without warrants; joint state-federal efforts guided by Maryland authorities.
- Wilford moves to suppress GPS/pinging evidence and seeks a Franks hearing challenging several applications as false or misleading.
- Court conducts hearings in Jan and Mar 2013; grants in part Wilford's Disclosure Motion and denies suppression without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disclosure motion scope | Wilford seeks internal memos about Maynard | Government work product and irrelevance to suppression | Granted in part, denied in part |
| GPS tracking and pinging suppression | GPS/pinging violated Fourth Amendment and state law; suppression required | Good faith exception; indicators of reasonable reliance on settled law | GPS/pinging evidence preserved under good faith; suppression denied unless later disclosures alter analysis |
| Franks hearing viability | False statements in pinging and warrant affidavits show deliberate or reckless falsehoods | Omissions were negligent, not deliberate/reckless; no Franks warranted | Franks hearing denied; no falsehood established to negate probable cause |
| Statutory pinging authority | Maryland pen register statute does not authorize pinging; unconstitutional | Pinging falls within pen register/trap-and-trace scope; warrants met Fourth Amendment | Pinging orders facially satisfied Fourth Amendment; statutory gap not controlling here |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) (GPS tracking constitutes a search; trespass approach to Fourth Amendment)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (2011) (exclusionary rule balancing; deterrence vs. costs; good faith considerations)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good faith exception to the exclusionary rule)
- United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) (public travel on open roads; initial GPS/beeper legality; no privacy expectation)
- Stone v. State, 178 Md.App. 428 (2008) (Maryland binding precedent permitting warrantless GPS in context prior to Jones)