October 2022
Massachusetts: GPS Monitoring as Condition of Probation Was Unreasonable Search
After defendant was convicted of rape and sentenced to incarceration followed by probation, the sentencing court denied defendant’s motion to vacate a condition of probation that imposed GPS monitoring for three years. Initially, the Massachusetts Supreme Court held that it could treat defendant’s Sex Offender Registry classification as dispositive of defendant’s risk of re-offense when evaluating the reasonableness of a search occasioned by GPS monitoring. The Court went on to reverse holding that the government’s interest in imposing GPS monitoring did not outweigh the privacy intrusion and thus monitoring was an unreasonable search where having the GPS device physically attached to his body significantly burdened defendant’s interest in bodily autonomy, the device’s required maintenance could impose a threat to defendant’s livelihood as it required a charged battery at all times, the information exposed through the GPS monitoring was uniquely revealing, defendant had no previous history of sex offenses, and it was unclear whether the device was configured with the exclusion zone around the victim’s home. Commonwealth v. Roderick, ___ N.E.3d ___ (09-16- 2022, WL 4281854).
Current Articles
- Registration for the 2025 Appellate Writing Workshop now open!
- Safe & Just Michigan
- Misdemeanor sentencing: What are the non-jail and non-probation options?
- SADO is hiring a Deputy Director!
- Marilena David named Director of the State Appellate Defender Office
- Michigan Supreme Court vacates and remands in Kvasnicka
- Safe & Just Michigan
- MAACS Administrator Keeley Blanchard is named a Champion of Justice!
- SADO Attorney to argue before MSC in May
- Community service – Can we do better?
Subscriber Comments