In Vermont, as well as across the U.S., the law provides specific protections related to privacy, especially when it comes to cell phones. One key issue that has arisen recently is whether the police can search a person’s phone during a traffic stop, especially when it involves obtaining real-time cell site location information (CSLI).
The Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that, under the state constitution, individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding their real-time CSLI, and police must obtain a warrant to access this data unless there is a recognized exception.
The Case: Chavis Murphy and the Warrantless Search
The case that brought this issue to light involved Chavis Murphy, a suspect in a fatal shooting. In December 2018, Vermont police sought to locate Murphy using his cellphone’s location data.
They requested an “emergency exigent ping” from his cellphone service provider, AT&T, claiming that they were dealing with a dangerous situation involving a shooter. AT&T complied and pinged Murphy’s phone, but initially, the phone was off.
Once the phone was turned back on, police obtained the location data, leading them to Murphy’s whereabouts in Massachusetts, where he was eventually arrested.
Murphy argued that the police violated both Vermont’s and the U.S. Constitution by obtaining his real-time CSLI without a warrant. However, the State argued that the warrant was not needed, citing the exigent circumstances exception.
Vermont Supreme Court’s Decision
The Vermont Supreme Court agreed with the State, ruling that obtaining real-time CSLI constitutes a search under Vermont’s Chapter I, Article 11 of the state constitution, which protects privacy in a way similar to the Fourth Amendment.
The Court emphasized that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their real-time CSLI, which gives authorities access to their exact location in real time.
The Court referred to the case Carpenter v. United States (2018), which ruled that historical CSLI requires a warrant due to privacy concerns, but noted that it had not yet ruled on real-time CSLI specifically.
The Court aligned with the reasoning in other states, like Massachusetts, which had found that real-time CSLI can be as invasive as tracking someone’s real-time movements. The Vermont Court also noted that society has become reliant on cell phones, and therefore, police should not have the ability to track someone’s movements through their phone without judicial oversight.
Exigent Circumstances and the Exception to the Warrant Requirement
The Court then considered whether the warrantless search was justified by the exigent circumstances exception. The police argued that the urgency of the situation—locating a murder suspect who was believed to be armed and dangerous—warranted the immediate use of the cellphone data without a warrant.
To assess whether the exigent circumstances exception applied, the Court referred to the Dorman factors, which help determine if an emergency justifies a warrantless search. These factors include:
Whether the crime involved is serious (in this case, a fatal shooting).
Whether the suspect is believed to be armed or dangerous.
Whether there is probable cause to believe the suspect committed the crime.
Whether there is a risk that the suspect will escape if not quickly apprehended.
The Court found that all these factors were present: the crime was serious (a fatal shooting), Murphy was believed to be armed, probable cause had been established, and there was a likelihood he would escape if not immediately apprehended.
Therefore, the Court ruled that the exigent circumstances exception applied, justifying the warrantless ping of Murphy’s phone.
Vermont Police and Cellphone Searches
In Vermont, while police may need a warrant to obtain real-time CSLI data in most cases, the exigent circumstances exception allows them to bypass this requirement in situations where immediate action is necessary, such as tracking a dangerous suspect in a violent crime.
This ruling underscores the balance between privacy rights and law enforcement needs, particularly in urgent situations.
If you are concerned about the privacy of your cellphone data, it’s important to understand that while police may not be able to access your data without a warrant under normal circumstances, there are exceptions that could allow for searches without prior approval in certain emergency situations.
