A Tulsa County deputy’s search of her license plate through Flock and VehicleManager systems amounted to an unconstitutional search.
A deputy had access to about 30 days of vehicle-location information across several states and found more than 50 sightings tied to a rental vehicle, according to the ruling. The deputy initially searched the California plate after seeing it on an Oklahoma highway, before he had identified a traffic violation or other basis to suspect criminal activity.
The court found that police cannot use a vast network of cameras to indiscriminately collect vehicle data, then retrieve a detailed history of a person’s movements on demand without probable cause and a warrant. U.S. District Judge Sara E. Hill said the technology can reveal sensitive information, including visits to medical providers, lawyers, fertility clinics, casinos or liquor stores.
The decision drew on Supreme Court privacy rulings involving cellphone location data, including *Carpenter v. United States* and this year’s *Chatrie v. United States*. The judge wrote that while motorists are visible on public roads, people can still have a reasonable expectation of privacy in “the whole of their physical movements” when law enforcement compiles and searches weeks of location records.
"Freedom from persistent, dragnet-style surveillance while in public is not a foreign concept in our society, and it is a reasonable expectation that society already accepts," wrote Hill.
In Fort Pierce, former Officer Josepher Crutchfield was arrested on four felony counts related to unauthorized computer access after police accused him of searching his ex-girlfriend’s license plate 382 times through the Flock database between October 2025 and July 2026, largely while off duty and without a legitimate law-enforcement purpose. He has not been convicted.
No comments:
Post a Comment