State v. Briggs IP Address Data Did Not Require Warrant Because It Could Not Show Person's Movements
Defendant moved to suppress IP address data proffered by the state in defendant's criminal case. Police had issued an emergency disclosure request to a cell service provider seeking information relating to a certain phone number, including the customer name, email address, and recent IP addresses. In response to the request, police received subscriber information and an IP address log for the number.
Police issued a subsequent subpoena to an ISP provider, which turned over information showing that the IP addresses in the log belonged to various casinos in Las Vegas. The state also issued grand jury subpoenas to Google seeking subscriber information and IP address data for several Gmail addresses. Google turned over information that included IP address data for several hotels and casinos in Las Vegas.
In support of his motion to suppress the IP address data, defendant argued that such data was equivalent to cell site location information, which the U.S. Supreme Court, in Carpenter v. U.S., 138 S.Ct. 2206, had ruled could only be obtained by law enforcement via a warrant. In opposition to defendant's motion, the state argued that IP address data was not analogous to CSLI and therefore did not require a warrant to request. Specifically, the state contended that a person did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his or her location when they shared their location information by logging into an ISP's network.
The court denied defendant's motion. The court first noted that multiple federal circuit courts had declined to extend Fourth Amendment protection to IP address data as the Supreme Court had for CSLI. The court agreed with the state that CSLI was distinct from IP address data since CSLI could provide law enforcement with information about both a person's location and their movements. Conversely, IP address data could not provide information about a person's movement, as the address data only showed the discrete locations where a person had logged into the internet. Thus, the court ruled that a warrant was not required for law enforcement to request IP address data from internet and cell data service providers.
source Daily briefing October 03, 2022 at 12:00 AM DOCKET
Case Number: 18-08-647 CASE DIGEST SUMMARY