Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Search and Seizure — cell phone tracking

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 24, 2014//

Search and Seizure — cell phone tracking

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 24, 2014//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Criminal

Search and Seizure — cell phone tracking

A defendant’s arrest after police tracked his cell phone did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

“This case presents two issues for review. First, did law enforcement agents violate Subdiaz-Osorio’s Fourth Amendment rights when they procured his cell phone location information without first obtaining a court order1 based on probable cause? Second, did Kenosha police officers violate Subdiaz-Osorio’s Fifth Amendment right to counsel when they continued to interview him after he asked how he could get an attorney?”

“The court is deeply divided on these issues as evidenced by the number of separate writings.”

“This opinion is the lead opinion. It will outline the legal conclusions of the writer, including a mandate that the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed. Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, Justice N. Patrick Crooks, Justice Patience Drake Roggensack, Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler, and Justice Michael J. Gableman concur solely in the mandate.”

Affirmed.

2010AP3016-CR State v. Subdiaz-Osorio

Prosser, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Pray, John A., Madison; For Respondent: O’Brien, Daniel J., Madison; Zapf, Robert D., Kenosha

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests