Carpenter v. United States

Carpenter v. United States
Argued November 29, 2017
Decided June 22, 2018
Full case nameTimothy Ivory Carpenter v. United States of America
Docket no.16-402
Citations585 U.S. 296 (more)
138 S. Ct. 2206; 201 L. Ed. 2d 507
ArgumentOral argument
Opinion announcementOpinion announcement
DecisionOpinion
Case history
PriorUnited States v. Carpenter, No. 2:12-cr-20218 (E.D. Mich. 2013).

Affirmed, United States v. Carpenter, 819 F.3d 880 (6th Cir. 2016).

Cert. granted, 581 U.S. 1017 (2017).
SubsequentAffirmed, 926 F.3d 313 (6th Cir. 2019).

Remanded for resentencing, 788 Fed. Appx. 364 (6th Cir. 2019).
Affirmed, No. 22-1198 (6th Cir. 2023).
Rehearing en banc denied (6th Cir. 2023).

Cert. denied (2024).
Questions presented
Whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records revealing the location and movements of a cell phone user over the course of 127 days is permitted by the Fourth Amendment.
Holding
Government acquisition of cell-site records is a search under the Fourth Amendment, and, thus requires a warrant.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Anthony Kennedy · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch
Case opinions
MajorityRoberts, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
DissentKennedy, joined by Thomas, Alito
DissentThomas
DissentAlito, joined by Thomas
DissentGorsuch
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. IV

Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case concerning the privacy of historical cell site location information (CSLI). The Court held that government entities violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution when accessing historical CSLI records containing the physical locations of cellphones without a search warrant.[1]

Prior to Carpenter, government entities could obtain cellphone location records from service providers by claiming the information was required as part of an investigation, without a warrant, but the ruling changed this procedure. Recognizing the influence of new consumer communications devices in the 2010s, the Court expanded its conceptions of constitutional rights toward the privacy of this type of data. However, the Court emphasized that the Carpenter ruling was narrowly restricted to the precise types of information and search procedures that were relevant to this case.[2][3]

  1. ^ Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018).
  2. ^ Ng, Alfred (June 22, 2018). "Supreme Court says warrant necessary for phone location data in win for Privacy". cnet.com. Archived from the original on June 22, 2018. Retrieved June 22, 2018.
  3. ^ "Cell Site Location Information: A Guide for Criminal Defense Attorneys" (PDF). Electronic Frontier Foundation. March 28, 2019. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 24, 2020. Retrieved January 22, 2021.

Carpenter v. United States

Dodaje.pl - Ogłoszenia lokalne