Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 16
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 16, § 648 (2026)

Search warrant needed for acquisition of location information

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as provided in this subchapter, a government entity may not obtain location information without a valid warrant issued by a duly authorized justice, judge or justice of the peace using procedures established pursuant to Title 15, section 55 or 56.   [PL 2017, c. 144, §5 (AMD).]
A justice, judge or justice of the peace may issue a search warrant for the location information of an electronic device pursuant to this section for a period of time necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization, but in any case the warrant is not valid for more than 14 days after the issuance. A justice, judge or justice of the peace may grant an extension of a warrant upon a finding of continuing probable cause and a finding that the extension is necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization. An extension may not exceed 30 days.   [PL 2017, c. 144, §5 (AMD).]
This subchapter does not apply to tracking devices, as defined in section 638, placed by law enforcement officers.   [PL 2019, c. 489, §13 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
RR 2013, c. 1, §29 (RAL). PL 2013, c. 519, §6 (AMD). PL 2017, c. 144, §5 (AMD). PL 2019, c. 489, §13 (AMD).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2015–2019 · leading case: United States v. Thompson, 866 F.3d 1149 (10th Cir. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Thompson, 866 F.3d 1149 (10th Cir. 2017). “5 (2) (West 2014); Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, § 648 (West 2014); Minn.”
State of Maine v. Nicholas Sexton, 2017 ME 65 (Me. 2017). “The SCA request occurred prior to the Legislature's enactment, in 2013, of 16 M.R.S. § 648 (2016), which prohibits a government entity from obtaining "location information of an electronic device” without a warrant.”
In re Tel. Info. Needed for a Crim. Investigation, 119 F. Supp. 3d 1011 (N.D. Cal. 2015). “In Utah, for example, “a government entity maynot obtain the location information ... of an electronic device without a search -warrant issued by a court upon probable cause,” subject to a handful of exceptions.”
State of Maine v. David W. Marble Jr., 2019 ME 157 (Me. 2019). · cites it 5× “16 M.R.S. § 648 (2018).6 Recently, the United States Supreme Court held that law enforcement’s acquisition of seven days’ worth of an individual’s historical cell site location information from wireless carriers constituted a search for Fourth Amendment purposes.”
State of Maine v. David W. Marble Jr., 2019 ME 157 (Me. 2019). · cites it 5× “16 M.R.S. § 648 (2018).6 Recently, the United States Supreme Court held that law enforcement’s acquisition of seven days’ worth of an individual’s historical cell site location information from wireless carriers constituted a search for Fourth Amendment purposes.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.