SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
An Indiana man may beat a drug prosecution after the state's highest court threw out a search warrant against him late last week. The search warrant was based on the idea that the man had "stolen" a GPS tracking device belonging to the government. But Indiana's Supreme Court concluded that he'd done no such thing—and the cops should have known it.
Last November, we wrote about the case of Derek Heuring, an Indiana man the Warrick County Sheriff's Office suspected of selling meth. Authorities got a warrant to put a GPS tracker on Heuring's car, getting a stream of data on his location for six days. But then the data stopped.
Officers suspected Heuring had discovered and removed the tracking device. After waiting for a few more days, they got a warrant to search his home and a barn belonging to his father. They argued the disappearance of the tracking device was evidence that Heuring had stolen it.
During their search, police found the tracking device and some methamphetamine. They charged Heuring with drug-related crimes as well as theft of the GPS device.
But at trial, Heuring's lawyers argued that the warrant to search the home and barn had been illegal. An application for a search warrant must provide probable cause to believe a crime was committed. But removing a small, unmarked object from your personal vehicle is no crime at all, Heuring's lawyers argued. Heuring had no way of knowing what the device was or who it belonged to—and certainly no obligation to leave the device on his vehicle.
An Indiana appeals court ruled against Heuring last year. But Indiana's Supreme Court seemed more sympathetic to Heuring's case during oral arguments last November.
"I'm really struggling with how is that theft," said Justice Steven David during November's oral arguments.
The appeals court[*] decision is available online as a pdf.
Also at: Washington Post and The Indiana Lawyer.
[*] Updated at 2020-02-26 01:16:51 UTC. Previously, this link suggested it was to the decision by the Indiana Supreme Court. This was, in fact, a link to the decision from the Indiana Appeals Court. We regret the error.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 26 2020, @01:30AM (2 children)
I have an A/C capacitor I can charge with 60kV from a spark plug coil. Find a connector and zap it. But being me, I'd take it apart first.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bradley13 on Wednesday February 26 2020, @08:01AM (1 child)
There's simply no justification for saying "removal" = "theft". The police may have the right to put it on your car. However, you have every reason to remove a foreign object with you find it. The court rulings are just bizarre.
The second thing that is bizarre: According to TFA, the device stopped reporting in. So the police actually had no knowledge of what had happened, or where it was. For all they knew, it might have fallen off and gotten run over. So: what was the basis for a warrant to search the guy's house?
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Wednesday February 26 2020, @09:05AM
I agree with you.
But as for a basis for a search warrant, I would assume that the reason they went to his house was that is the last place the gps worked. (I still agree with the court not allowing the warrant, but I hope that is the reason why they went there.)
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P