Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog
When Massachusetts courts require GPS monitoring as part of pretrial release, many people are unaware that the location data collected may later be used as evidence against them. In a recent ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court, the justices reviewed whether law enforcement could lawfully access and rely on GPS records collected during monitoring to investigate a new incident. This case is important because it shows how conditions imposed before any conviction can still affect your rights well into the future.
If you are accused of a crime in Massachusetts, the conditions tied to your release may seem routine or temporary. However, as this case shows, each requirement can have lasting consequences. You need a criminal defense attorney who understands how to challenge surveillance measures and safeguard your rights from the beginning.
Massachusetts Court Confirms GPS Data from Bail Monitoring Can Be Used
The case focused on a man charged with domestic violence who was later released with GPS monitoring as a condition of bail. Months after his release, law enforcement pulled his location data from the GPS device to investigate a separate shooting. At trial, his legal team tried to suppress the GPS records, arguing that collecting and later using that data violated the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.
The Supreme Judicial Court rejected that argument. The justices ruled that placing a GPS monitor on someone released before trial is a “search,” but that it can be legal if done for legitimate government reasons. Here, the court emphasized the need to protect others and ensure that the person followed the release conditions. As a result of those concerns, the justices said the GPS requirement was reasonable.
They also held that law enforcement’s review of the data later did not constitute a new search. The court reasoned that the accused had already agreed to monitoring and understood that their movements could be tracked. Since the data review was limited in scope and tied to the release conditions’ goals, the justices allowed it.
How This Ruling Affects Pretrial Rights in Massachusetts
If you are accused of a crime, courts may set pretrial conditions as part of your release. These may include avoiding certain individuals, reporting to probation, or wearing a GPS device. This case makes it clear that agreeing to GPS monitoring may involve more than a temporary loss of location privacy.
In Massachusetts, Article 14 of the Declaration of Rights protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, courts weigh that protection against government interests. If the government’s reason is strong and the search is limited, the court may still uphold it, even if it feels intrusive.
As a result, the boundary between freedom and surveillance can become difficult to define. A GPS device is not just used to confirm compliance. It may also be used later to support new allegations.
Do Not Wait to Contest Pretrial Monitoring Conditions
If you are released on pretrial conditions that include GPS monitoring, every moment you delay in asserting your rights can reduce your ability to limit how that data is used. Courts in Massachusetts often admit GPS evidence without thorough scrutiny, especially when no objection was raised early in the process. Once law enforcement accesses your location history, it becomes far more difficult to argue that the collection was improper or that its use overstepped the boundaries set by the court.
Legal intervention should begin as soon as the conditions of release are discussed. A criminal defense lawyer can object to GPS monitoring at the bail hearing and propose less invasive alternatives such as personal recognizance, regular check-ins, or a stay-away order. If the court still imposes electronic monitoring, your attorney can ask the judge to restrict how the data may be used, who can access it, and how long it may be stored.
If you are already being monitored, your lawyer can request a hearing to evaluate whether the court’s order complies with Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. Your legal team can also file a motion to suppress GPS records if law enforcement later tries to use that data in an unrelated investigation or prosecution without first securing judicial approval.
Too often, GPS conditions are treated as a standard requirement of pretrial release. In reality, they represent a powerful form of surveillance that may lead to long-term consequences. Acting quickly allows you to protect your privacy, challenge overreach, and avoid giving the prosecution unnecessary leverage.
Call a Boston Criminal Defense Attorney Before You Accept GPS Monitoring
The use of GPS data in Massachusetts criminal cases is growing. Do not let law enforcement gain access to your movements without understanding your legal options. The Law Office of Patrick J. Murphy can review your case, evaluate your pretrial conditions, and fight to protect your rights. Call (617) 367-0450 today for a free consultation. You can also reach out through our contact form to schedule a time that works for you.