Acquiring Cell Site Location Information Requires Warrant

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 基地局位置情報取得捜査と令状の要否
  • 基地局位置情報取得捜査と令状の要否 : Carpenter v. United States判決を契機として[米国連邦最高裁2018.6.22]
  • キチキョク イチ ジョウホウ シュトク ソウサ ト レイジョウ ノ ヨウヒ : Carpenter v. United States ハンケツ オ ケイキ ト シテ[ベイコク レンポウ サイコウサイ 2018.6.22]
  • in reference to Carpenter v. United States
  • Carpenter v. United States 判決を契機として

Search this article

Abstract

In June 22, 2018, the Supreme Court made a landmark decision, which held in a 5-4 decision that The Government’s acquisition of Carpenter’s cell-site records was a Fourth Amendment search. Prior to Carpenter, the Supreme Court held that a person had no legitimate expectation of privacy in regards to dialed telephone numbers conveyed to telephone company voluntarily turned over to third parties, and therefore a search warrant was not required to obtain the information. This legal theory is known as the third-party doctrine, established by the Supreme Court case Smith v. Maryland (1979). In this paper, we discuss the third-party doctrine and analyze each justice’s opinion about the Supreme Court Decision of Carpenter case.

Journal

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top