Federal Appeals Court Says Police May Trespass to Place GPS on Vehicles

Juan Pineda-Moreno was under suspicion by agents of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) for trafficking in marijuana, but they lacked sufficient evidence to arrest him. So they did the next best thing: they decided to spy on him using global positioning technology to track his movements in the hopes that he would visit places that would implicate him with others known to be in the drug trade.

To do this, they sneaked upon his property in the wee hours of the morning and affixed a GPS device to the underside of his car. Then, all they had to do was monitor the places the GPS reported he traveled to each day. Not only does this technology provide the positioning of a particular vehicle, but also the date and time.

As a result of this spying --- all done without a court order or other legitimate protections against abuse by the law enforcement community --- Peneda-Moreno was arrested and charged with marijuana manufacture and conspiracy. His attorney attempted to fight the case by challenging the constitutionality of the placement of the GPS device as a violation of the Fourth Amendment, but the appeals court ruled otherwise, stating that because Pinda-Moreno had not physically or otherwise manifested an intent to deter any persons from coming onto his property, the DEA agents did not break any laws by sneaking up to the car which was parked in his driveway, and accessible to anyone.

The use of GPS systems is becoming more frequent by state and federal law enforcement agencies. By the time the Supreme Court decides the case, perhaps thousands of innocent persons will have been unwittingly subjected to the same procedures.

If this has not killed traditional notions of the right to privacy, it certainly is a serious wound administered by the a traditionally liberal court that brings us closer to the "Big Brother" society our constitutional rights seek to prevent.