Cellphones shouldn’t be tracking devices for police: Maryland court

Maryland’s judiciary issued an opinion effectively crying out for the legislative branch to provide a policy ruling on police use of cellphone-tracking technology. But it doesn’t look like the state’s General Assembly will be acting this year.
On Wednesday, the Court of Special Appeals issued a full written opinion in a case where the panel of judges ruled that the police should get a warrant before using the cell-tracking device known as a stingray.
There isn’t much legalese, as the court notes that the info obtained in the Baltimore case of Kerron Andrews was “constitutionally tainted.” Here’s the sentence from the 74-page opinion that pretty much sums it up:

We conclude that people have a reasonable expectation that their cell phones will not be used as real-time tracking devices by law enforcement, and—recognizing that the Fourth Amendment protects people and not simply areas—that people have an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in real-time cell phone location information.

The ruling was a direct rebuke of Attorney General Brian Frosh, who wrote in a brief for the case that people who don’t want to be tracked should turn off their phones.
That debate appeared in Annapolis earlier this month as Del. Charles Sydnor (D-Baltimore County), proposed a Maryland bill to require police to get a stricter court order. But its chances appear to be dead this year. Records show that the bill was reported “unfavorable” out of the House Judiciary Committee, with Sydnor among the 21 members voting for the unfavorable report. At the hearing we attended, law enforcement reps requested more time to work on the bill before next year’s legislative session.
On the judicial side, the courts could weigh in before that if the Andrews case is appealed to the highest court in Maryland, the Court of Appeals.