<p>&ldquo;Cellphone users have an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy,&rdquo; said Judge Andre Davis, one of the majority in the 2-1 decision on Wednesday that ruled a warrant is necessary for the government to obtain information from a citizen&rsquo;s cellphone. ;</p>
<p>The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided on Wednesday that obtaining cell-site location information (CSLI) qualifies as a 4th Amendment search because &ldquo;society recognizes an individual&rsquo;s privacy interest in her movements over an extended time period.&rdquo;  ;This decision contradicts rulings in the third, fifth, and eleventh circuit courts and many expect the case to go to the Supreme Court. ;</p>
<p>Did you know that most cellphones keep a detailed history of location even when location services are off? After a similar ruling on Thursday by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Lucy Koh explained that modern cellphones automatically connect with cellular towers, generating a stream data which can later be used like a map to track a person&#8217;s movements. ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor the Ninth Circuit has squarely addressed whether cell phone users possess a reasonable expectation of privacy in the CSLI, historical or otherwise, associated with their cell phones,&rdquo; said Koh. ;</p>
<p>United States v. Graham came about after Baltimore police used a suspect&rsquo;s CSLI to pinpoint his location after a series of robberies. Their actions were deemed &ldquo;unreasonable&rdquo; and a &ldquo;violation of the appellants&rsquo; Fourth Amendment rights.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p> ;</p>
<p> ;</p>