Simon v. San Francisco

Amicus Brief of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees

Brief filed: 05/17/2024

Documents

Simon v. San Francisco

9th Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. 24-1025

Prior Decision

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Case No. 4:22-cv-05541

Argument(s)

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office’s (“Sheriff” or “SFSO”) policy of sharing pretrial releasees’ location data with other law enforcement agencies and officers on an ongoing basis as part of the pretrial Electronic Monitoring (“EM”) program is not necessary to achieve the program’s stated goals of ensuring public safety and appearance in court.  For decades, law enforcement agencies in California have used EM as a less restrictive alternative to pretrial detention without sharing the private and constitutionally protected information of pretrial releasees.  Pretrial releasees’ location data also is not shared on an ongoing, warrantless basis in the federal EM system, further demonstrating that effective monitoring can be achieved without compromising a pretrial releasee’s privacy and due process rights. Ultimately, if SFSO determines that sharing a pretrial releasee’s location data is necessary for public safety, there is a simple solution: they can obtain a warrant. But the warrantless, ongoing sharing of location data belonging to presumptively innocent pretrial releasees is a plainly unnecessary violation of the constitutional rights to privacy and due process.  

Author(s)

Galia Z. Amram, Laura Lively Babashoff, Lara McDonough, Chloe Connolly, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA.

Explore keywords to find information

RECENTLY ADDED & UPCOMING

  1. The Champion
    /Nacdl/media/image_library/StayInformed/Champion/ChampionCovers/March-April-2025.jpg?ext=.jpg

    March/April 2025

    What are the evidentiary implications of field sobriety tests in marijuana cases? Does the odor of marijuana give officers probable cause to search a vehicle?

  2. Amicus Brief
    /Nacdl/media/image_library/Elements/global/amicus.png

    Jenner & Block LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice

    Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and New York Council of Defense Lawyers as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

  3. News Release
    /Nacdl/media/image_library/Elements/global/newsrelease.png

    News Release ~ Law Enforcement Executive Order

    NACDL Warns Executive Order's Dangerous Overreach Undermines Community Safety and Trust in Police – Washington, DC (April 29, 2025) – The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) expressed deep concern regarding the Executive Order titled "Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens," cautioning that several of its proposals represent a dangerous overreach that undermines these goals by jeopardizing individual rights and the legitimacy of law enforcement in the eyes of the community.

  4. Event
    /Nacdl/media/image_library/Learn/nacdlcleinstitute/2025_Post-Dobbs_Trial_Tactics_2025-02-26_v02_Event-Listing_2.jpg?ext=.jpg

    Trial Tactics for Pregnancy-Related Cases: Skills for Every Defender

    LOCATION: The University of Texas School of Law, Austin, TX
    DATE: May 16-17, 2025
    COST: FREE (registration is required)
    CLE Credit: Up to 14.5 credits 

  5. Webinar
    /assets/img/nacdl_og.png

    Collaborative Approaches to Appellate Defense: Recognizing Clients' Legal Expertise

    WHEN: Thursday, May 8, 3:00-4:30pm ET / 12:00-1:30pm PT
    CLE CREDIT: not available
    COST: Free

Featured Products