cellphone

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court cast doubt Monday on whether police may obtain cellphone data to find crime suspects.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices said this location data showing where a cellphone user has traveled is personal and private and subject to the protection of the 4th Amendment’s ban on unreasonable searches.

Justice Elena Kagan said these “records serve as a personal journal of a user’s movements.”

She said the data “resembles other private materials—think of emails, documents, photographs, or calendars—that even if stored on Google’s servers, a user reasonably views as his own…and reasonably expects to be shielded from the inquisitive eyes of the government.”

Because an “individual has a legitimate expectation of privacy in his cellphone location data,” she said police investigators need a valid search warrant from a magistrate.

The court stopped short of deciding the proper basis for a search warrant in such cases. Instead, the justices sent the case back to judges in Virginia.

But the outcome casts doubt on “geofence warrants.”

In recent years, police have gone to Google and cellphone companies seeking tracking data on cellphones that were at a crime scene. Some times, they have had a warrant from a magistrate.

Civil libertarians say the use of this tracking data raises the specter of mass surveillance on innocent people.

Police and government lawyers say no one has a reasonable right to privacy when they are walking on a sidewalk or driving down the street.

The case before the court arose from the armed robbery conviction of a Virginia man who stole $195,000 from a credit union in a small town near Richmond.

By the time police arrived, the robber had fled. But surveillance cameras showed he was carrying a gun and a cellphone.

Lacking other leads, detective Joshua Hilton asked a judge to issue a special type of warrant seeking information from Google.
Referred to as a “geofence warrant,” it seeks data from phones in a particular area at a particular time.

The detective sought data on phones that were within 150 yards of the credit union within one hour of the late afternoon robbery.

After examining and paring down the data, the detective asked for the phone records of Okello Chatrie. Then, with a search warrant of his home, investigators found two robbery-style demand notes, a semi-automatic pistol and about $100,000 in cash.

A judge refused to suppress the evidence from an allegedly unconstitutional “search”, and Chatrie entered a conditional guilty plea.
The full 4th Circuit Court of Appeals split evenly on the legality of the geofence warrant, and the Supreme Court agreed to decide the issue in Chatrie vs. U.S.

Usually investigators obtain warrants to search the home or vehicle of a known crime suspect.

The new and disputed geofence warrrants seek to find a suspect by examining data on the cellphones that were at the scene of a crime.

The FBI used this cellphone data in 2021 to identify suspects who broke through police barracks on Jan. 6, 2021, and pushed their way into the Capitol to disrupt the official counting of electoral votes.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson agreed on the outcome in Chatrie vs. U.S.

In a 21-page dissent, Justice Samuel A. Alito said the court had “carefully set the stage for its planned performance: striking a pose as a great champion of privacy in the digital age. I cannot support this irresponsible escapade.”

Justice Clarence Thomas agreed.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett agreed in a one-paragraph dissent. “Chatrie had no reasonable expectation of privacy in data about his public movements that he voluntarily disclosed to Google,” she said.

A cellphone belonging to David Anthony Burke, better known as the singer D4vd, contained “a significant amount of child pornography,” a prosecutor said in court Thursday morning.

Los Angeles County Deputy Dist. Atty. Beth Silverman made the claim during a court proceeding to schedule a preliminary hearing on murder charges in the killing of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez. The images were uncovered as part of a broad series of search warrants executed on Burke’s phone and iCloud account, Silverman said.

Burke’s attorneys have insisted he is innocent and are demanding his preliminary hearing begin next week, meaning evidence in the closely followed case could become public as soon as May 1. He appeared in court Thursday in an orange jail jumpsuit and walked into court with his hands in his pockets.

A status hearing was set for April 29. Silverman and a district attorney’s office spokesperson declined to comment outside the courtroom. The singer’s attorney, Blair Berk, also declined to comment.

The D.A.’s office spokesperson declined to say if the child sex abuse material allegedly found on Burke’s phone was related to Hernandez or another victim.

Burke was arrested by Los Angeles police last week and charged Monday with murder, continuous sexual abuse of a child and corpse mutilation, according to a criminal complaint. He has pleaded not guilty.

Defendants have a right to have a preliminary hearing, in which a judge determines whether prosecutors have enough evidence to bring a case to trial, within 10 business days. But Berk’s push to move quickly is unorthodox. She has publicly grilled Silverman about needing access to more discovery materials, and the medical examiner’s report detailing how Hernandez died was not made public until Wednesday.

Joshua Ritter, a former L.A. County prosecutor, said Berk was playing a “hell of a game of chicken” but she may be aiming to pressure test the prosecution’s case.

“The defense might want to put the D.A. on their heels if they feel for some reason there was a rush to make an arrest. But this case is nearly the opposite of that,” he said. “They’ve had more than adequate time … this does not seem like a situation where the D.A. made a hasty decision to file.”

Silverman said police amassed “40 terabytes” of digital evidence in the case, which has made uploading and transmitting materials to the defense difficult. Silverman also said police had conducted a wiretap operation in the case, but did not disclose the nature of it. The veteran prosecutor said even she had “not received anything” related to that operation.

She also confirmed prosecutors convened three secret grand jury hearings after Hernandez’s death — two in November and December in 2025 and one in February. Those were investigative grand jury hearings, meaning prosecutors could use them to enshrine testimony against Burke, but could not use the proceedings to secure an indictment against Burke. Transcripts from all three hearings will also need to be unsealed.

L.A. County Superior Court Judge Charlaine Olmedo also warned Berk that if she does push for the immediate preliminary hearing, she may not have access to the entire compendium of evidence before May 1.

Ritter also mused that Burke could be pushing his attorneys to fight the case without delay. Beyond that, he said, the approach “makes no sense.”

“The defense is seven months behind the eight ball on this. They not only have the grand jury transcripts to catch up on but who knows what kind of digital forensics and wiretaps and everything else,” he said.

Silverman also seems intent on bringing the case to trial as soon as possible. Silverman noted Thursday marked the one-year anniversary of the date prosecutors believe Hernandez was killed, and said she intended to put the case before a jury within 60 days of the completion of a preliminary hearing.

The singer allegedly began sexually abusing Hernandez in September 2023, when she was just 13. Burke’s attorneys have said the case cannot stand up to scrutiny and pushed for the immediate preliminary hearing.

Hernandez was reported missing from her family’s Lake Elsinore neighborhood three times in 2024, and she was spotted at some of D4vd’s concerts during that time frame.

Prosecutors allege Hernandez was last seen at Burke’s Hollywood Hills residence on April 23. She “threatened to expose his criminal conduct and devastate his musical career,” according to L.A. County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman, though the prosecutor has not answered questions about whether Hernandez was going to report Burke to police.

Burke surged in popularity after one of his tracks was included in the wildly popular video game “Fortnite,” and he has also collaborated with artists like 21 Savage. He was beginning to tour in support of his debut album, “Withered,” when reports surfaced linking him to Hernandez’s death. He quickly canceled all shows.

The details of the crime echoed some of the violent imagery associated with Burke’s songs. The Queens-born vocalist has appeared in a music video filled with violent imagery: a young woman with an apparent chest wound lies on a bed as the singer hovers over her, blindfolded, his white shirt spattered with blood. In another video, “One More Dance,” D4vd drags a person — who bears the singer’s likeness — to a car, where a couple stuffs the person into the trunk.

Hernandez’s badly decomposed body was found in the trunk of a Tesla at a Hollywood tow yard last September. An autopsy report made public this week revealed she died from a pair of stab wounds to the chest and abdomen. When police arrived on the scene, they found Hernandez’s body was “dismembered” and two of her fingers had been amputated, according to the medical examiner’s report.

Prosecutors charged Burke with murder with special circumstances, including allegations that Hernandez was a witness to a crime — her own sexual abuse — and that Burke killed her for financial gain to protect his ascendant music career. If convicted as charged, he faces life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty. Prosecutors have yet to decide if they will seek capital punishment in the case.