Supreme Court ruling could free convicted trafficker

High Court’s decision on warrantless tracking affects Butler case.

Caesar Creek Lake boater falls overboard, medics attempting rescue
Updated 8 min. ago
Beach Waterpark sued by Ohio Attorney General's Office for failure to deliver
Updated 20 min. ago
Worker falls 20 feet from utility pole
11:14 a.m.
Out-of-state shoppers arrested in clothing theft
10:14 a.m.
Fairfield gas station robbed at gun point
10:02 a.m.
> More headlines

By Denise G. Callahan, Staff Writer 10:29 PM Sunday, January 29, 2012

The unanimous opinion from the Supreme Court ruling warrantless GPS tracking of criminal suspects is unconstitutional could impact the outcome of a convicted drug trafficker’s case in Butler County.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last Monday that law enforcement must obtain a search warrant before they use GPS devises to keep tabs on criminal suspects.

Aron Rich, 38, of Los Angeles, Calif., was convicted by a Butler County jury last week of complicity to traffic in cocaine, trafficking in cocaine and possession of cocaine.

Part of the evidence used to convict him involved a GPS tracker.

His attorney believes the high court ruling could help on appeal.

Judge Craig Hedric ruled since the car was a rental, Rich had no expectation of privacy. Rich’s former attorney cited the then pending U.S. Supreme Court case in trying to convince Hedric to suppress the GPS evidence.

The Supreme Court ruling places great emphasis on a defendant’s expectation of privacy, Rich’s attorney Martin Pinales says he thinks that’s important.

“It is clear that Aron was driving with an expectation of privacy,” Pinales said. “If you read the opinions it seems to hinge around that expectation of privacy. If you own an apartment and I rent it from you I stand in the shoes of you. It’s going to be a very interesting case.”

Local law enforcement could not recall a similar case in the Miami Valley.

Mark Brownfield, police chief in Englewood, which uses its traffic control cameras and other technology extensively, said though he didn’t quite follow the justices’ logic, he had no problem with the decision.

“I believe in a person’s right to privacy. I have no problem getting warrants. I say amen, hallelujah. The burden on law enforcement should be quite high. If I can convince a judge I have probable cause for an action, I am protected,” he said.

Every case is different Pinales said, but even though his case has a nuance not contemplated by the Supreme Court, the ruling might still make a difference.

In the Rich case police rented the vehicle, placed the tracker on it and then gave it to a confidential informant who rode with co-defendants in the case to and from the Dayton airport and eventually turned it over to Rich. He met up with his co-defendants at a Walmart in West Chester Twp., picked up the cocaine at a storage locker and was busted with $1.2 million worth of cocaine along with Daniel Rubio-Rodriguez of Hamilton and Santiago Ayon Sanchez of California.

Rubio-Rodriguez and Santiago Ayon Sanchez pleaded guilty and were sentenced to seven and eight years in prison respectively. Their attorneys chose not to comment on the Supreme Court’s ruling.

In Warren County both Prosecutor David Fornshell and Drug Task Force commander John Burke said they saw this ruling coming and have no cases that might be subject to reversal due to this decision.

“We felt like this was coming and we have been obtaining search warrants for those routinely for some time,” Burke said. “We are ahead of the curve.”

Staff writer Doug Page contributed to this story.

Share this article