RM258: GPS and the 4th Amendment--Stay Tuned

RM258: GPS and the 4th Amendment–Stay Tuned

Is GPS monitoring unconstitutional? When the Supreme Court remanded Grady v. North Carolina back to the state, it essentially said that GPS monitoring after an individual has completed their sentence and is off of supervision (including any probation or parole), violates an individual’s 4th amendment right. The court agreed that GPS monitoring of a private citizen is an illegal search.

The Court’s sent the case back to North Carolina, where it took another four years until lawyers for Torrey Grady won their case in that state’s Supreme Court. We highlight why that positive win has not yet eliminated the use of GPS (also known as Satellite Based Monitoring) for those no longer under community supervision.

Programs in various states differ in important ways. For instance, not every state allows for lifetime monitoring. Of the ones that do, some allow for monitoring only if the offender is on probation or parole, while others allow unsupervised individuals to be monitored. So the patchwork of laws in different jurisdictions makes it difficult to have consistency for how the ruling is applied.

Also, the court ruled that GPS monitoring might not be unconstitutional if the monitoring is “reasonable.” Since each state can determine what is considered reasonable, the state can argue that lifetime monitoring is not unconstitutional because they consider it reasonable. We believe more litigation will be needed to close loopholes states use to continue this practice.

We also expand on a listener’s question from several episodes back about Nevada law, and remind listeners that federal guidelines are merely advisory. States are allowed to go beyond them. Therefore, don’t rely on federal guidelines when making determinations on your case. Instead, rely on your state’s guidelines.

We also cover two articles briefly. One is a follow up to a recent episode about military sexual assault cases. The other details the positive steps being taken to improve voting rights to individuals with felony convictions.


[05:16] Importance of not alienating committee members when testifying before legislative committees.

[09:15] Follow up to listener’s question about sentencing in Nevada.

[21:01] Detailed discussion of GPS monitoring.

[44:00] Sexual assaults on U.S. military academies.

[47:02] Legislation that advances voting rights for those with felony convictions.

How to Contact and Listen to Registry Matters

The Registry Matters Podcast’s mission is to cover issues surrounding the Registry. We cover cases that will peel back the veneer of what we need to do to change our lives for the better. We cover news articles that spark conversations about the total insanity of this modern day witch hunt. This podcast will call out bad policy and call out those that are making bad policy.

To change things for the positive, we need to act. We are 6-7-8-900k strong. With that many people, plus their friends and family, over a million people are affected by the registry. We should be able to secure donations to hire lawyers and lobbyists to move the agenda in our favor. We need our people to be represented.

3 thoughts on “RM258: GPS and the 4th Amendment–Stay Tuned

  1. So, in Wisconsin I pay $240 a month for GPS monitoring. So in the last 4.5 years I have been charged $13k in services. If found unconstitutional would I be able to get all my money back due to the unconstitutionality of the law? I know probably not, but this is killing me financially.

    • Hopefully now that Janet Protasiewicz has been elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court things will get better. This ended a 15-year far right wing conservative controlled Supreme Court.

  2. I’m hoping the lawsuit regarding the ankle monitor statute will be refiled now that Janet Protasiewicz has been elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. This ended a 15-year Conservative Republican majority. I’m in the same situation as 181 of us were sent letters in October 2018. My 2 conviction stemming from the same incident occurred in Texas in 1998. I moved from Texas to Wisconsin in March of 2018 and 7 months later in October I received my letter. That was four and a half years ago. To claim the ankle monitor is not considered punishment must be easy when a person is not Shackled. Wisconsin is also confused between a repeat habitual offender and a person with two or more convictions. It is common practice for State prosecutors to split and file multiple charges regarding one incident. It’s called the shotgun approach. This does not make a person a repeat habitual offender. I wish you luck William. Trust in God and hire a good lawyer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *