Minnesota Supreme Court discusses “geo-fence” warrants
This image was generated by AI and may not depict real events.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that 'geo-fence' warrants are constitutional but were used too broadly in a murder case. The decision may impact a conviction in a Dakota County murder case.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has weighed in on 'geo-fence' warrants for the first time, ruling that the technology is constitutional. However, the court found that it was used too broadly in a Dakota County murder case. Ivan Contreras-Sanchez was convicted of second-degree murder for the 2021 killing of Manuel Mandujano. The conviction is now being reconsidered by the Minnesota Court of Appeals due to the Supreme Court's ruling. Geo-fence warrants allow police to collect location data from devices within a specific area. The court's decision may have implications for future cases involving this type of warrant.
This content was automatically generated and/or translated by AI. It may contain inaccuracies. Please refer to the original sources for verification.