An Entity of Type: WikicatUnitedStatesDistrictCourtCases, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

United States v. Graham, 846 F. Supp. 2d 384 (D. Md. 2012), was a Maryland District Court case in which the Court held that historical cell site location data is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Reacting to the precedent established by the recent Supreme Court case United States v. Jones in conjunction with the application of the third party doctrine, Judge Richard D. Bennett, found that "information voluntarily disclosed to a third party ceases to enjoy Fourth Amendment protection" because that information no longer belongs to the consumer, but rather to the telecommunications company that handles the transmissions records. The historical cell site location data is then not subject to the privacy protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment standard of probable cause, but rather to

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • United States v. Graham, 846 F. Supp. 2d 384 (D. Md. 2012), was a Maryland District Court case in which the Court held that historical cell site location data is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Reacting to the precedent established by the recent Supreme Court case United States v. Jones in conjunction with the application of the third party doctrine, Judge Richard D. Bennett, found that "information voluntarily disclosed to a third party ceases to enjoy Fourth Amendment protection" because that information no longer belongs to the consumer, but rather to the telecommunications company that handles the transmissions records. The historical cell site location data is then not subject to the privacy protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment standard of probable cause, but rather to the Stored Communications Act, which governs the voluntary or compelled disclosure of stored electronic communications records. A three judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the district court on the Fourth Amendment issue in August 2015, but the full court en banc upheld the district court in May 2016. Its validity has grave doubt after the Supreme Court of the United States decided Carpenter v. United States in 2018. (en)
dbo:thumbnail
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 35012317 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 22315 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1121822178 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:citations
  • 172800.0 (dbd:second)
dbp:court
dbp:dateDecided
  • 2012-03-01 (xsd:date)
dbp:docket
  • 1 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullName
  • United States of America v. Aaron Graham, and Eric Jordan (en)
dbp:imagesize
  • 150 (xsd:integer)
dbp:judge
dbp:keywords
dbp:name
  • United States v. Graham (en)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dct:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • United States v. Graham, 846 F. Supp. 2d 384 (D. Md. 2012), was a Maryland District Court case in which the Court held that historical cell site location data is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Reacting to the precedent established by the recent Supreme Court case United States v. Jones in conjunction with the application of the third party doctrine, Judge Richard D. Bennett, found that "information voluntarily disclosed to a third party ceases to enjoy Fourth Amendment protection" because that information no longer belongs to the consumer, but rather to the telecommunications company that handles the transmissions records. The historical cell site location data is then not subject to the privacy protections afforded by the Fourth Amendment standard of probable cause, but rather to (en)
rdfs:label
  • United States v. Graham (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:depiction
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License