Government's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Suppression of Evidence Obtained Pursuant to Google Geofence Warrant
Defendant's Reply to Government's Response to Motion to Suppress Evidence Obtained from Search of Information Associated with Mr. Chatrie's Google Accounts
Defendant's Reply to Government's Response to his Motion for Discovery Regarding Government's Use of Google's Sensorvault Data
Amicus Brief by Google, LLC In Support of Neither Party Concerning Defendant's Motion To Suppress Evidence From A "Geofence" General Warrant
Defendant's Motion for Issuance of a Subpoena Duces Tecum Pursuant to Rule 17(c) and Memorandum in Support Thereof
Government's Response to Defendant's Motion for Issuance of a Subpoena Duces Tecum Pursuant to Rule 17(c)
Government's Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Discovery of Sensorvault Data
Defense challenges use of Google location data from everyone in vicinity of Hull Street Road bank robbery.
(Richmond Times-Dispatch) Chatrie’s lawyers with the federal public defender office and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers argue in their suppression motion that Lauck 'should treat the geofence warrant here as any other general warrant: repugnant to the Constitution. Geofence warrants represent an unprecedented expansion of the government’s surveillance capabilities.'
(Lawfare) Unlike traditional warrants that identify a particular suspect in advance of a search, geofence warrants essentially allow the government to work backward. These warrants compel a technology company (so far, only Google) to disclose anonymized location records for any devices in a certain area during a specified time period.
(The Washington Post) Prosecutors called the case the first of its kind, though the issue has come up in other states, including New York, North Carolina, Florida and Minnesota. Experts expect that geofence warrants will be the next big Fourth Amendment battle in digital privacy.
(NBC News) As more police use such warrants, the method is raising concerns among privacy advocates, who say the government is gathering information from people in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches.
(International Business Times) Though geofencing warrants proved to be a powerful weapon for investigators, the practice has been criticised for its diluting effect on the Fourth Amendment right. That exactly is Chatrie’s defense.
An accused bank robber claims the police broke the law when they used Google location data to track him down. Privacy advocates agree.
(Insider) In theory, the geofence warrant attempts to take the idea of a physical crime scene and reimagine it for an internet-connected world. But that can lead to situations where innocent bystanders may have their personal information sucked up by police in wholesale ways that wouldn't have happened before the ubiquity of internet-connected smartphones.
Pattern Cross-Examination of Expert Witnesses: A Trial Strategy & Resource Guide
In a criminal trial, cross-examination of the prosecution’s forensic expert may make the difference between victory or defeat.
2020 Sample Motions Collection Update
NACDL’s 2020 Sample Motions Collection is the follow-up to our wildly popular 2019 Sample Motions Collection and contains the newest and most recent additions to our ever-expanding Sample Motions library.
State v. Stone - A Case Study on Child Sexual Molestation & Sexual Battery
The criminal defense attorney tasked with defending such a case has to be prepared to not only show reasonable doubt, but to answer this question: If it did not happen, how is it that the child believes it did happen?
POZNER ON CROSS: Advanced Cross of Experts & Officers in DUI Cases
It’s not your strong opening argument. It’s not how many of your impassioned objections the judge sustains. It’s not even how you tie your theory of the case together with a dazzling closing statement bow. What wins your trial is your cross.
This is a sponsored ad
Manage Your Law Firm All in One Place