Scenario
In 2010, Peter Miller was imprisoned due to the participation in a group that was engaged in illegal arms sales. The members of the group had no license and violated other laws, while the brother of the convict was also suspected to be a part of this group, his guilt was not proved. When Miller was released from prison in 2018, the instigator, Adam Green, decided to make sure that he would not relapse into criminal behavior. After receiving a warrant, the investigator attached a Global Positioning System (GPS) device to Miller’s vehicle to be aware of his movements. Within a year of monitoring, Green discovered that Miller started to gather his previous accomplices, and a new crime was conducted. The key question is whether the actions of Green as an investigator using GPS were legal or not?
Answer
I (Issue) – This case focuses on the behaviors of Miller, the released convict, and Green, the investigator. The issue for the trial court is to decide whether Green was eligible to attach the GPS device for the purpose of monitoring and trespass or not.
R (Rule) – Under the Fourth Amendment, unreasonable searches are prohibited, and warrants are to be issued. In United States v. Jones, the judges decided that personal effects of the defendant were trespasses, but the further search was in consistence with the Fourth Amendment.
A (Analysis) – In this case, Miller faced the violation of his rights since the actions of the investigator were unconstitutional. However, the search by police was appropriate as the warrant was obtained before installing the GPS device.
C (Conclusion) – Therefore, Miller is liable for privacy violation, while the search conducted by the investigator to reveal criminal activity was reasonable.