“Absent a search warrant, the government may not turn a citizen’s cell phone into a tracking device”.
Advertisement
A federal judge in New York State has pushed back against Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) use of Stingray data, saying the data it collected isn’t admissible.
Pauley rejected the discovery of narcotics, three digital scales, empty zip lock bags and other drug paraphernalia that was seized from a Manhattan apartment during an worldwide drug-trafficking organization probe by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
“Here, the use of the cell-site simulator to obtain more precise information about the target phone’s location was not contemplated by the original warrant application”, the judge ruled.
U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley III in Manhattan said in a written ruling that using devices known as a “Stingray”, “Hailstorm”, or “TriggerFish” to locate a suspect’s phone is unconstitutional without a warrant.
“This is the first federal ruling I know of in which a judge squarely ruled that the Fourth Amendment requires police to get a warrant to use a stingray, and suppressed evidence derived from warrantless use of the technology”, Nathan Wessler, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told Ars Technica.
The ACLU has counted 66 law enforcement agencies in 24 states and the District of Columbia that own Stingrays or related technology, but warns that the actual number may be far greater, since the authorities keep the devices shrouded in secrecy.
In the current case, the decision finds that since “pings” from Lambi’s phone needed specialised technology to receive – the cell site simulator – it amounted to unreasonable search.
The U.S. Justice Department in September changed its internal policies and required government agents to obtain a warrant before using a cell site simulator. An attorney for Lambis noted that this took place a week after his client was charged.
Advertisement
The case against Lambis is ongoing, but the judge threw out the drug evidence in the case.
