Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Harry Katzin

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided October 22, 2013No. 12-2548Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partVan Antwerpen, Circuit Judge

To briefly recap: In December 2010, law enforcement officers, after consulting an Assistant United States Attorney, and in accord with the general policy of the United States Department of Justice, magnetically attached an independently battery *217operated “slap on” Global Positioning System device (“GPS device” or “GPS”) upon the undercarriage of Harry Katzin’s vehicle, while that vehicle was parked on a public street. It was conceded at argument that the officers had probable cause to do so, although they did not obtain a warrant. For two days, law enforcement used that GPS to track the…

2Cases cited80 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Larry Bonner v. City of Prichard, AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1981
  5. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

75 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API