State v. Nicolas Subdiaz-Osorio

¶ 89. (concurring). I agree with the dissent that the tracking of a cell phone constitutes a search in the context of the Fourth Amendment and that the warrantless search here was not justified by exigent circumstances. Dissent, parts I-V Likewise, I agree that Subdiaz-Osorio's statement was sufficient to invoke his right to counsel. Dissent, part VI.

¶ 90. However, I part ways with the dissent because, like the court of appeals, I conclude that the circuit court's errors in denying the defendant's suppression motion were harmless. There is no reasonable probability that the circuit court's…