is set to rule on whether or not law enforcement officers need a warrant in order to track a suspect's vehicle with a
device. The case centers around Antoine Jones, whose vehicle was bugged for a month without his consent or a go-ahead from the justice department. The police have argued that such tracking shouldn't require a warrant because the location of Jones' vehicle on public streets is public knowledge. Advocates arguing against that stance say that the comprehensive surveillance constitutes an unjust invasion of privacy.
No one is disputing the fact that Jones was, in fact, selling cocaine when his vehicle was monitored.
Lower courts have sided with Jones' attorneys on the privacy issue in the past, though there is a precedent for allowing evidence obtained through warrantless
to be upheld. The issue seems to be exactly how long law enforcement continues the tracking. Either way, law enforcement, prosecution and defense attorneys will all have a close eye on the outcome of the Jones case.