Issue

Exclusionary rule—cell-site location information—good faith exception—statutory and constitutional analyses

Summary

In a prosecution for drug trafficking and possession, the trial court did not err by denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained from cell-site location information (CSLI) as authorized by an order (issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d); hereinafter, Section 2703(d) Order) that was later determined to be unsupported by probable cause. First, the statutory good faith exception to the exclusionary rule (contained in N.C.G.S. § 15A-974(a)(2)) did not apply to prevent the suppression of the CSLI because that evidence was not obtained in substantial violation of Chapter 15A of the General Statutes. However, exclusion was not required under the federal or state constitutions. Since the detective's reliance on the Section 2703(d) Order was objectively reasonable, the challenged evidence was subject to the federal constitutional good faith exception to the exclusionary rule arising out of the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court expressly overruled State v. Carter, 322 N.C. 709 (1988)–which held that Article I, section 20 of the North Carolina Constitution contains an exclusionary rule–but assumed without deciding that such a rule does arise under the state constitution and, moreover, that the rule contains a good faith exception equivalent to the federal exception. Since exclusion was not required under either constitution, the decision of the Court of Appeals overruling the trial court and granting defendant a new trial was reversed.

Summary from the North Carolina Reports digest (official subject index). Read the opinion →