Whigham v. City of Atlanta

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that war-rantless tracking of defendant’s vehicle without a proper warrant violated the Fourth Amendment
• finding Knotts sufficiently binding appellate precedent to authorize GPS tracking at the time officers installed the device on defendant’s vehicle
• “The remedy for an unlawful search is the suppression of evidence obtained as a result of that search.... This remedy is known as the ‘exclusionary rule.’ ”
• “before Jones, binding appellate precedent in Maryland, namely Knotts, authorized the GPS tracking of a vehicle on public roads”
• “before Jones, binding appellate precedent in Maryland, namely Knotts, authorized the GPS tracking of a vehicle on public roads”
• “before Jones, binding appellate precedent in Maryland, namely Knotts, authorized the GPS tracking of a vehicle on public roads”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).