Pre-Jones GPS data not subject to suppression in 7th, 8th, and 9th Circuits due to good faith exception

In United States v. Amaya, 2012 WL 1188456 (N.D. Iowa 2012), a motion to suppress GPS data because law enforcement obtained it in good faith prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Jones.

The defendant is facing multiple drug charges. After Jones was handed down in January, Amaya was given the opportunity to file a motion to suppress GPS evidence in the case. Law enforcement had used GPS devices on multiple vehicles without a warrant for periods of time ranging from one to four months.

In considering the motion to dismiss, the judge found that even if the use of the GPS devices violated the Fourth Amendment, suppression is not required because under Davis v. United States, the good faith exception would apply. Since the Eighth Circuit had ruled that no warrant was required for the use of GPS (Marquez, 605 F.3d 604), the investigators were acting in good faith based on binding precedent because Jones had yet to be decided.

Prior to Jones, the Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits had all determined that a search warrant was unnecessary for the use of GPS devices, which could lead to the good faith application in 19 states for data that has already been acquired. Last month, a California district court also held the good faith exception to be applicable (United States v. Nwobi, 2012 WL 769746 (C.D. Cal. 2012)).

In Amaya, the prosecution had also failed to disclose the use of GPS surveillance during discovery, and the court considered if suppression or other sanction was appropriate. The use originally came out during trial, and a mistrial was declared. The judge found that the failure to disclose was in bad faith, but "the prejudice to Amaya has largely been remedied." While the judge decided not to require suppression, a hearing was scheduled to determine a proper sanction including the possibility of "taking away the prosecution's peremptory strikes and/or closing rebuttal argument."