How can a Georgia criminal defense lawyer challenge GPS tracking evidence?
GPS and location tracking evidence can place a person at particular locations over time, and challenging it in a Georgia case often centers on whether the tracking required a warrant and whether the data is reliable. Because location information can be highly revealing, the legal basis for obtaining it is a central question.
The need for a warrant is a primary consideration. Courts have recognized that certain forms of location tracking constitute a search, so obtaining historical location data or attaching a tracking device generally implicates Fourth Amendment protections. Where tracking was conducted without proper authorization, the resulting evidence may be challenged through a motion to suppress under O.C.G.A. 17-5-30.
Notably, the accuracy of location data is a separate question. GPS and cell-based location information varies in precision, and a data point may reflect a general area rather than a precise position. What location evidence actually establishes, as opposed to how it is presented, can be examined.
The interpretation of the data also matters. Location records may show the position of a device rather than a specific person, so whether the evidence ties an individual to a location, rather than merely a device, can be relevant to its weight.
Challenging GPS tracking evidence generally turns on whether it was lawfully obtained and what it can reliably show about a person’s location. Two threads tend to carry the most weight: the warrant question that governs whether the data comes in at all, and the gap between tracking a device and placing a particular person at a location.