According to the court documents you will see below, if you have it enabled smartphone you have automatically given your consent to be monitored.
2014, the Baltimore Police received a warrant for the arrest of Kerron Andrews for attempted murder.
To find it by the authorities, they asked permission (PDF) to use their location data and all outgoing calls.
The request, however, nowhere mentions the use of Hailstorm (a kind of Stingray - a device mobile data collection device, also known as a “bag”) to collect this data from the suspect's smartphone.
Η police he used it anyway.
The authorities' use of the Stingray is nothing new. But when a judge learned how the data was collected, he concluded the police had violated the "Fourth Amendment" in arresting Andrews and granted the defense's request to throw out the evidence. data collected by Stingray.
Here, however, the interest of the case begins. The state appealed against the decision.
He argued that the court was wrong in its initial decision, claiming that Andrews volunteered the information from his cell phone to the Authorities (and other third parties) when he opened his phone.
We do not know what will happen. If the Maryland Court of Appeal succeeds in overturning the court's original decision and stating that the evidence gathered with the use of Stingray is lawful, all state courts may rely on that decision to justify the use of mass data collection without warrant.