Boston Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled that courts may impose GPS monitoring as a condition of release without violating the state constitution. If you are facing criminal charges in Massachusetts, and a judge orders you to wear a GPS device, you may be wondering whether that order is legal. In Commonwealth v. Goparian, the court clarified how far the Commonwealth may go when imposing electronic tracking during pretrial release.
This decision affects many defendants who are accused but not convicted. Understanding its implications is critical if you are currently subject to pretrial monitoring or if your release is under review.
Court Confirms GPS Monitoring Does Not Automatically Violate Privacy Rights
In this case, the court examined whether requiring GPS monitoring as part of bail conditions constituted an unreasonable search under Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. The defendant claimed that being tracked, even before a conviction, infringed on privacy protections.
The court disagreed. It held that GPS tracking can be justified when the government shows a valid interest in protecting public safety or ensuring compliance with court orders. The ruling emphasized that the monitoring must be proportional to the circumstances. If properly justified, and if the accused receives notice, courts have discretion to impose these conditions.
What This Means If You Are Charged and Awaiting Trial
If you are accused of a crime and the court considers pretrial release conditions, electronic tracking could become part of your daily life. The decision confirms that Massachusetts judges can authorize GPS monitoring in a wide range of cases. The state must justify its use, but the standard is not difficult to meet.
You have the right to challenge unnecessary or overly broad tracking. Your attorney can present arguments based on the specific facts of your case. If public safety is not genuinely at risk, or if less invasive options exist, the court may be persuaded to modify or remove the monitoring condition.
The Court’s Ruling on GPS Data Access
The ruling also addressed whether accessing data collected through GPS tracking counts as a separate search. According to the court, it does not. If you are placed on monitoring and the terms are spelled out in the release order, the state may later review your location history without obtaining a warrant. This makes it especially important to understand and potentially contest the monitoring terms at the outset.
If the court imposes GPS tracking and your defense team does not object or seek limitations, prosecutors may later use the data to build a case against you. That could include arguing that you were near a scene of interest or violated a no-contact order.
Why Pretrial Release Strategy Must Begin Immediately
The Goparian decision shows that timing and preparation matter. If you are charged with a crime, you must act quickly to assert your rights and limit unnecessary intrusions. Bail hearings are not just about whether you walk free, they also determine what conditions will follow you while you await trial.
A well-prepared attorney will gather evidence about your ties to the community, lack of prior violations, and other favorable facts to help reduce or eliminate restrictive conditions. You should not assume the state’s proposal will be automatic or final. Every case allows room for negotiation and challenge.
Call the Law Office of Patrick J. Murphy Today
If you are subject to GPS tracking or facing any criminal charges in Massachusetts, call the Law Office of Patrick J. Murphy at (617) 367-0450. Our firm provides precise and aggressive representation to individuals throughout Boston and beyond. Do not wait until pretrial conditions shape the outcome of your case. Take control early with experienced legal guidance