Anytime the police arrest someone for a crime, one of the first things a criminal defense attorney will consider is whether the police had a valid reason to arrest the individual. For example, if a man was arrested on drug charges after getting pulled over for running a red light, a criminal defense attorney may question whether the police had a valid reason to search the man's car.

If an attorney can prove the police did not have a valid reason to search the car, the drug charges against the man may be dropped. Last year, a drug kingpin was arrested, convicted and sentenced to life in prison because of a deluge of drug charges.

Recently, the Supreme Court decided to overturn the conviction.

The question at hand was over whether it was legal for the police to use GPS devices to track criminal suspects, and the Supreme Court voted unanimously to restrict the police's ability to use GPS tracking.

Although the decision by the justices seems like a victory for individuals who are under criminal investigation, it is only one step in that direction. The decision was "nuanced and incremental, leaving open the larger questions of how government may use the information generated by modern technology for surveillance purposes."

The justices objected because the police did not have a search warrant to attach a GPS to the suspect's jeep and monitor his movements for a month. Without the GPS device, the police likely would not have been led to the stash house, which was one of the most influential pieces of evidence in the case.

It will be interesting to see how this case influences other cases in the future, especially as the limits of technology continually spiral forward.

Source: The Washington Post, "Supreme Court: Warrants needed in GPS tracking," Robert Barnes, Jan. 23, 2012