U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART II— CRIMINAL PROCEDURE › Chapter CHAPTER 205— SEARCHES AND SEIZURES

18 U.S.C. § 3117

Mobile tracking devices

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—If a court is empowered to issue a warrant or other order for the installation of a mobile tracking device, such order may authorize the use of that device within the jurisdiction of the court, and outside that jurisdiction if the device is installed in that jurisdiction.(b)Definition.—As used in this section, the term “tracking device” means an electronic or mechanical device which permits the tracking of the movement of a person or object.(Added Pub. L. 99–508, title I, § 108(a), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1858.)Editorial NotesCodification

Another section 3117 was renumbered section 3118 of this title.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 21, 1986, and, in case of conduct pursuant to court order or extension, applicable only with respect to court orders and extensions made after such date, with special rule for State authorizations of interceptions, see section 111 of Pub. L. 99–508, set out as an Effective Date of 1986 Amendment note under section 2510 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 92 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: In Re Application for Pen Register & Trap/Trace Device With Cell Site Location Auth., 396 F. Supp. 2d 747 (S.D. Tex. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Application for Pen Register & Trap/Trace Device With Cell Site Location Auth., 396 F. Supp. 2d 747 (S.D. Tex. 2005). · cites it 6× “Pub.L. No. 99-508, Title I, § 108(a), 100 Stat.”
In Re the United States for an Order Authorizing the Use of a Pen Register & a Trap & Trace Device, 396 F. Supp. 2d 294 (E.D.N.Y 2005). · cites it 6× “As will become evident in the discussion below, any such difference between the two applications may be critical to a determination of whether the disclosure of cell site information implicates the rules applicable to a “tracking device” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 3117 (b). That…”
United States v. Gabriel Werdene, 883 F.3d 204 (3d Cir. 2018). · cites it 4× “41(a)(2)(E) (incorporating the definition of “tracking device” from 18 U.S.C. § 3117 (b), 14 which is “an electronic or mechanical device which permits the tracking of the movement of a person or object.”
State v. Sveum, 2010 WI 92, 787 N.W.2d 317. · cites it 6× “Said legislative action would be consistent with analogous Wisconsin statutes that currently require court authorization of the interception of wire, electronic, or oral communications, see Wis.”
United States v. Ackies, 918 F.3d 190 (1st Cir. 2019). · cites it 5× “We reject the argument that the cell phones were tracking devices under 18 U.S.C. § 3117 , and that the PLI warrants violated Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.”
United States v. Powell, 943 F. Supp. 2d 759 (E.D. Mich. 2013). · cites it 9× “Tracking Devices under 18 U.S.C. § 3117 ............... 769 d. Wiretaps.”
In re the United States for an Order Authorizing Disclosure of Location Info. of a Specified Wireless Tel., 849 F. Supp. 2d 526 (D. Md. 2011). · cites it 4× “However, if the government seeks to use a particular cellular telephone as a tracking device to aid in execution of an arrest warrant, the government must obtain a tracking device warrant pursuant to Rule 41(b) and in accord with 18 U.S.C. § 3117 . As set forth more fully below,…”
United States v. Steven Vincent Smith, 935 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2019). · cites it 3× “” 18 U.S.C. § 3117 (b); see also Fed. R. Crim.”
In Re the United States for Orders Pursuant to Title 18, 509 F. Supp. 2d 64 (D. Mass. 2007). · cites it 8× “Part of the SCA’s purpose, as clearly gleaned from the title of section 2703, is to dictate the means by which access may be granted to stored wire and electronic communications and transactional records.”
United States v. Steven Horton, 863 F.3d 1041 (8th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “, using “an electronic or mechanical device which permits the tracking of the movement of a person or object,” 18 U.S.C. § 3117 (b). The government argues that the defendants made a “virtual” trip 2 On December 1, 2016, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(b)(6) was added to…”
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012). “41(e)(2)(A)(i), and they did not install the GPS device within the District of Columbia, as required by the terms of the warrant and by 18 U.S.C. § 3117 (a) and Rule 41(b)(4). In the courts below the Government did not argue, and has not argued here, that the Fourth Amendment…”
United States v. Caraballo, 963 F. Supp. 2d 341 (D. Vt. 2013). · cites it 4× “Federal law governs government “installation of a mobile tracking device,” 18 U.S.C. § 3117 (emphasis supplied), which simply does not occur in the pinging process in which the government accesses a cell phone’s inherent capabilities to obtain location data without installing…”
Show all 92 citing cases →
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.