Federal ruling reportedly finds Flock vehicle-history search unconstitutional
PolicyUnverifiedUpdated:
404 Media reports that a federal judge in Oklahoma found an officer’s Flock automated license-plate-reader search unconstitutional after the officer used a California plate to retrieve a woman’s month-long travel history.
A ruling on a warrantless vehicle-history query
404 Media reported that Judge Sara Hill ruled an Oklahoma officer’s warrantless query of Flock’s automated license-plate-reader system violated the defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights. The officer reportedly used the resulting travel history as part of the basis to search her vehicle. The judge characterized the network’s use in this context as indiscriminate mass surveillance.
The report describes other court cases considering warrantless automated license-plate-reader searches, but it does not provide a comparable prior ruling for this specific case.
According to 404 Media, the ruling treated the officer’s Flock search of historical vehicle-location data as a warrantless Fourth Amendment search and excluded both Flock-derived evidence and evidence from the vehicle search. The decision is limited to this case’s facts and is not binding precedent.
A fact-specific decision without binding precedent
The reported decision addresses whether broad historical location records gathered through a networked vehicle-camera system can constitute a constitutional search. It is fact-specific and nonbinding, while other cases are considering the legality of warrantless ALPR searches.
Sources
- 404 MediaFederal Judge Rules a Flock Search Was ‘Indiscriminate Mass Surveillance’ and UnconstitutionalRead source →