Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in the case of Torrey Dale Grady v. North Carolina
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-593_o7jq.pdf
"Grady was twice convicted as a sex offender. In 2013, North Carolina ordered that, as a recidivist, he had to wear a GPS monitor at all times so that his location could be monitored. He challenged the court, saying that the tracking device qualified as an unreasonable search."
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-youre-being-220522445.html
The court sided with Mr. Grady, that GPS monitoring devices do constitute a search for purposes of 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure, to force state courts to carefully examine whether the state can require a sex offender to wear a GPS.
That said, however, because other forms of technology such as Smart phones and vehicles have GPS devices installed in them and the handler uses them freely, the ruling in Grady may be a moot point for those sex offenders who voluntarily use items that they know or should know have a GPS devise installed and thereby permitting the state to tract their location without implicating the 4th Amendment.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-593_o7jq.pdf
"Grady was twice convicted as a sex offender. In 2013, North Carolina ordered that, as a recidivist, he had to wear a GPS monitor at all times so that his location could be monitored. He challenged the court, saying that the tracking device qualified as an unreasonable search."
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-youre-being-220522445.html
The court sided with Mr. Grady, that GPS monitoring devices do constitute a search for purposes of 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure, to force state courts to carefully examine whether the state can require a sex offender to wear a GPS.
That said, however, because other forms of technology such as Smart phones and vehicles have GPS devices installed in them and the handler uses them freely, the ruling in Grady may be a moot point for those sex offenders who voluntarily use items that they know or should know have a GPS devise installed and thereby permitting the state to tract their location without implicating the 4th Amendment.
Voluntarily wearing a device or driving in a car is not going to be the same as wearing a court mandated device that can get you put in prison on a new criminal charge if you don't put it on, it falls off, or is destroyed for whatever reason.
The states will fight at first, but I believe they will see the money that is being spent isn't the best bang for their buck. I can see it coming in the way they talk about all the other money issues plaguing our states and country.
said they are Wanting strings .read all about it ;