Commonwealth V. Mora
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth Full Court: SJC-12890 Filed: 3/27/2020 4:33 PM COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Supreme Judicial Court SUFFOLK, SS. NO. SJC-12890 COMMONWEALTH, Appellee, v. NELSON MORA, ET AL., Appellants. ON RESERVATION AND REPORT FROM THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY BRIEF FOR THE COMMONWEALTH MAURA HEALEY Attorney General Anna Lumelsky (BBO#677708) Gina Masotta (BBO #669602) Assistant Attorneys General Criminal Bureau One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108 (617) 963-2334 email: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................ 4 QUESTION PRESENTED ............................................................................... 10 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ......................................................................... 10 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ...................................................................... 12 I. Using various investigative methods, law-enforcement officers uncover extensive evidence of drug trafficking by appellants ..... 12 II. Investigators install pole cameras that video-record public areas and capture relevant evidence. ..................................................... 14 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ............................................................... 16 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................... 19 I. STANDARD OF REVIEW ......................................................... 19 II. THE USE OF POLE CAMERAS HERE WAS NOT A SEARCH UNDER EITHER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT OR ARTICLE 14.......................................................................... 19 A. Individuals Have No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy In Discrete Acts or Things That They Knowingly Expose to Public View, as Appellants Did Here. ........................... 20 B. Decisions Addressing Location-Tracking Technologies Do Not Overrule the General Public-View Principle. ....... 26 C. Pole Cameras are Different from Location-Tracking Technologies. ..................................................................... 32 D. Appellants Had No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in Video Footage Captured by Pole Cameras in This Case. .. 42 III. AFFIRMANCE IS WARRANTED IN ANY EVENT BECAUSE POLICE ACTED IN GOOD FAITH. ....................... 46 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 48 2 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ................................................................ 49 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ......................................................................... 50 ADDENDUM ................................................................................................... 51 3 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986) ......................................................................... 20, 21, 24, 26 California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988) ....................................................................................... 21, 26 Carpenter v. United States, 138 S.Ct. 2206 (2018) ................................................................................. passim Commonwealth v. Almonor, 482 Mass. 35 (2019) ................................................................................... passim Commonwealth v. Augustine, 467 Mass. 230 (2014) ................................................................................. passim Commonwealth v. Brown, 456 Mass. 708 (2010) .........................................................................................47 Commonwealth v. Connolly, 454 Mass. 808 (2009) .................................................................................. 23, 27 Commonwealth v. D’Onofrio, 396 Mass. 711 (1986) .................................................................................. 22, 38 Commonwealth v. Fredericq, 482 Mass. 70 (2019) ...........................................................................................47 Commonwealth v. Johnson, 481 Mass. 710 (2019) ............................................................................ 19, 30, 38 Commonwealth v. Nelson, 460 Mass. 564 (2011). ................................................................................. 46, 47 Commonwealth v. One 1985 Ford Thunderbird Automobile, 416 Mass. 603 (1993) .................................................................................. 23, 44 4 Commonwealth v. Rivera, 445 Mass. 119 (2005) .........................................................................................22 Commonwealth v. Rousseau, 465 Mass. 372 (2013) .........................................................................................30 Commonwealth v. Santiago, 470 Mass. 574 (2015) .........................................................................................46 Commonwealth v. Sergienko, 399 Mass. 291 (1987) .........................................................................................23 Commonwealth v. Starr, 55 Mass. App. Ct. 590 (2002) .............................................................................23 Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161 (1998). ........................................................................................35 Commonwealth v. Wilkerson, 436 Mass. 137 (2002) .........................................................................................46 Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989) ..................................................................................... 20, 21 Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) ......................................................................... 20, 38, 44, 45 Maryland v. Macon, 472 U.S. 463 (1985) ............................................................................................21 New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106 (1986) ..................................................................................... 21, 26 People v. Tafoya, No. 17CA1243, 2019 WL 6333762 (Colo. App. Nov. 27, 2019) ..................................................25 Shafer v. City of Boulder, 896 F. Supp. 2d 915 (D. Nev. 2012) ...................................................................25 5 Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) ............................................................................................35 State v. Duvernay, 92 N.E.3d 262 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017) ..................................................................25 State v. Holden, 964 P.2d 318 (Utah Ct. App. 1998) ....................................................................39 State v. Jones, 903 N.W.2d 101 (S.D. 2017) ..............................................................................25 State v. Rigel, 97 N.E.3d 825 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017) ..................................................................25 State v. Torres, No. 2 CA–CR 2010–0283, 2011 WL 4825640 (Ariz. Ct. App. Oct. 12, 2011) ..............................................25 United States v. Adams, No. 3:08-CR-77, 2011 WL 13161193 (N.D.W. Va. Feb. 23, 2011) ...............................................25 United States v. Aguilera, No. 06-CR-336, 2008 WL 375210 (E.D. Wis. Feb. 11, 2008) .......................................................25 United States v. Bailey, No. 15-CR-6082G, 2016 WL 6995067 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 29, 2016) ...................................................25 United States v. Baltes, No. 8:11-CR-282 (MAD), 2013 WL 11319002 (N.D.N.Y. Apr. 22, 2013) ...................................................25 United States v. Birrueta, No. 13-CR-2134-TOR, 2014 WL 11369624 (E.D. Wash. Mar. 21, 2014) ...............................................25 United States v. Brooks, 911 F. Supp. 2d 836 (D. Ariz. 2012) ..................................................................25 United States v. Bucci, 582 F.3d 108 (1st Cir. 2009) ............................................................ 24, 26, 40, 47 6 United States v. Campuzano-Chavez, No. CR-15-00154-HE 2016 WL 879326 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 7, 2016) .....................................................25 United States v. Cantu, 684 Fed. Appx. 703 (10th Cir. 2017) ..................................................................25 United States v. Cruz, No. CR1800827001PHXDGC, 2019 WL 5268881 (D. Ariz. Oct. 17, 2019) ........................................................45 United States v. Cuevas-Sanchez, 821 F.2d 248 (5th Cir. 1987). ...................................................................... 25, 39 United States v. Curtis, 901 F.3d 846 (7th Cir. 2018) .............................................................................47 United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1 (1973) .................................................................................................21 United States v. Edmonds, No. 2:18-CR-00225-01, 2020 WL 573272 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 5, 2020) ......................................................24 United States v. Gilliam, No. 02:12-CR-93, 2015 WL 5178197 (W.D. Pa. Sept. 4, 2015) .......................................................25 United States v. Houston, 813 F.3d 282 (6th Cir. 2016) ....................................................................... 24, 34 United States v. Jackson, 213 F.3d 1269 (10th Cir. 2000) ............................................................. 25, 39, 41 United States v. Janis, 428 U.S. 433 (1976) ............................................................................................46 United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) ...................................................................................