Several years ago, I wrote about law enforcement use of cell site simulators, or Stingrays, noting that “[t]here’s a controversy about the legal status of these devices.” This post discusses some new cases that attempt to resolve the controversy. Stingrays. Stingrays are portable devices that simulate cellular towers and connect to mobile phones. Law enforcement officers sometimes use Stingrays to locate a suspect’s phone. When the device connects to the phone it is seeking, it can alert its operator and can provide information about the direction from which the signal is coming. By following the direction indicated by the device, officers may locate the phone, and therefore often the suspect. If you’d like to read more about the technology, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Wikipedia have additional information. The controversy. There are not many cases addressing whether using a Stingray is a search or a seizure for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. This is likely a result of the secrecy with which Stingrays have historically been used, a topic I’ll leave for another post. In any event, it is possible to make arguments either way. One could argue that a Stingray simply “catches” the signals broadcast to the public by a suspect’s cell phone, and so does not infringe on any reasonable expectation of privacy. On the other hand, one could argue that a Stingray effects a search (by tracking the location of a suspect) or a seizure (by effectively disabling the suspect’s phone for as long as it is connected [...]
Faculty Coordinators
