Vikas Dhar was quoted in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly regarding a pivotal decision from the Supreme Judicial Court that affirms law enforcement’s ability to retrieve and review GPS data from pretrial releases without a warrant. The ruling, in Commonwealth v. Govan, centered on whether Boston police violated Anthony Govan’s constitutional rights when they accessed his location data—originally imposed as a condition of release in an unrelated domestic violence case—to investigate a separate shooting incident.
The SJC upheld the trial court’s denial of Govan’s motion to suppress the GPS evidence. While the court acknowledged that the imposition of GPS monitoring constitutes a search under Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, it found the search reasonable given the state’s interest in protecting victims and ensuring compliance with court-ordered conditions. The court went further in concluding that retrieving and reviewing the GPS data for the shooting investigation did not amount to a “search” under the law, as Govan did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his location data once monitored.
The decision significantly impacts the privacy rights of individuals on pretrial release. By ruling that monitored individuals do not retain a reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements, the court effectively permits warrantless review of GPS data for unrelated criminal investigations. Critics argue that this blurs the line between individuals awaiting trial—who are still presumed innocent—and convicted offenders under probationary supervision.
In his remarks to Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, Vikas Dhar highlighted the troubling implications of the decision. “Given that defendants often agree to monitoring to avoid incarceration, the court questioned whether such ‘consent’ is truly voluntary,” Dhar said. His comments bring attention to the coercive nature of pretrial electronic monitoring, where individuals may accept intrusive surveillance simply to avoid being jailed, raising serious concerns about the voluntariness and fairness of such agreements.
The ruling in Commonwealth v. Govan sets a precedent that could open the door to broader, less regulated law enforcement use of location data from GPS-monitored individuals. As digital surveillance tools become more embedded in the criminal legal system, this case casts a spotlight on the growing tension between public safety interests and the preservation of constitutional protections, particularly for those who have not yet been convicted of a crime.
At Dhar Law, LLP, our award-winning criminal defense team scrutinizes the evidence brought by the prosecution and holds law enforcement accountable to protect our clients’ rights. If you or someone you know has been accused of a crime, please contact us today. Don’t face these charges alone – contact a member of our team today at 617-880-6155.
