Florida law can make the nonconsensual installation or use of a GPS tracker, location-tracking application, AirTag, or similar electronic tracking technology a felony criminal offense.
Technology has made it easier than ever to determine where another person is located, where a vehicle has traveled, or where someone spends his or her time. That convenience can create serious criminal exposure when a tracking device or tracking application is placed or used without the required consent. Florida Statute § 934.425 specifically addresses the installation, placement, and use of tracking devices and tracking applications, and Florida lawmakers have significantly increased the consequences associated with violations of this law. Conduct that someone may view as checking on a spouse, following a vehicle, protecting property, investigating suspected infidelity, or locating another person can result in a felony arrest. If you are being investigated or have already been charged, I would examine not only whether a tracker existed, but who owned the property, whether consent existed, what you knew, how the technology was used, and whether one of the statutory exceptions applies.
What Does Florida Statute § 934.425 Prohibit According To A Florida Criminal Defense Attorney?
Florida Statute § 934.425 is titled "Installation or use of tracking devices or tracking applications; exceptions; penalties." The current statute defines a tracking device as a device whose primary purpose is to reveal its location or movement through electronic signals. It defines a tracking application as software whose primary purpose is tracking or identifying an individual's location or movement.
The central prohibition is broad. Section 934.425(2) states, in relevant part, that a person may not knowingly "install or place a tracking device or tracking application on another person's property" without consent. It also prohibits knowingly using tracking technology to determine the location or movement of another person or that person's property without consent.
That second part is especially important. The law no longer focuses only on who physically attached the tracker. A prosecution may be based upon alleged use of the device or application to monitor location or movement, which means the investigation may involve account records, application logins, cellular data, cloud records, text messages, emails, device histories, and statements made to police.
A private attorney can begin analyzing those records before the government's interpretation of them becomes the only version of events presented to the prosecutor. I would want to determine who created the tracking account, who had access to it, whether multiple people knew the login credentials, when access occurred, what property was supposedly monitored, and whether the State can connect the alleged activity to you beyond a reasonable doubt.
What Must The State Prove Under § 934.425?
A key word in the statute is knowingly. An accidental installation, mistaken access, automatic location-sharing feature, forgotten family-sharing setting, or technology that was activated by another user can present a different legal issue from intentionally tracking a person without permission.
Depending upon the prosecution theory, the State may attempt to establish facts such as:
- You knowingly installed or placed a qualifying tracking device or tracking application on another person's property without that person's consent.
- You knowingly used qualifying tracking technology to determine another person's location or movement, or the location or movement of that person's property, without consent.
- The object or software involved satisfied the statutory definition of a tracking device or tracking application.
- No statutory exception applied to the conduct alleged by the State.
These issues can become fact-intensive very quickly. Simply discovering that your name is associated with an Apple ID, Google account, GPS subscription, cellular account, or device purchase does not necessarily establish every element of the offense.
A private Florida criminal defense attorney can challenge the link between you and the alleged tracking activity rather than treating the existence of a tracker as proof of guilt. The defense may also examine whether police obtained phones, account information, location histories, or other digital evidence through a valid warrant, consent search, subpoena, court order, or another legally permissible method.
What Exceptions Does A Florida Criminal Defense Attorney Examine?
Section 934.425 contains several express exceptions. These exceptions can become central to the defense because conduct that initially appears prohibited may fall within a legally recognized category.
The statute contains exceptions involving law enforcement acting lawfully during criminal investigations, specified corrections and juvenile justice personnel, people authorized by a court order, certain parents or legal guardians of minor children, qualifying caregivers of elderly people or disabled adults, people acting in good faith for a legitimate business purpose, and qualifying owners or lessees of motor vehicles. The precise requirements matter, and merely claiming a business, family, caregiving, or ownership reason does not automatically satisfy the statute.
The motor vehicle exception deserves particular attention. An owner or lessee may fall within the exception when installing, placing, or using tracking technology on the vehicle during the period of ownership or lease, subject to statutory requirements concerning removal, transfer of title, expiration of the lease, and specified consent requirements.
I would compare the exact facts with the statutory language rather than assuming the exception applies or does not apply. Vehicle title records, lease contracts, purchase agreements, court orders, parenting plans, written consent, employer policies, and contemporaneous communications may substantially alter how the case should be evaluated.
Consent Can Become The Central Issue In A Tracking Device Case
Consent is often more complicated than a simple yes or no. A person may have agreed to location sharing months earlier, enabled a family-location feature, shared account access, consented to installation on jointly used property, or authorized tracking for a particular purpose. The dispute may then concern whether the consent continued, whether it had limits, or whether it was revoked before the alleged tracking occurred.
Florida law also identifies circumstances in which consent is presumed revoked. If married people previously consented to tracking and one files a petition for dissolution of marriage, consent is presumed revoked. The statute also provides for presumed revocation when either person files certain specified protective injunction proceedings against the other.
That makes dates critical. I may need to establish when consent was originally given, when a divorce or injunction proceeding was filed, when the tracker was installed, when it was accessed, and whether any use occurred after consent was legally presumed revoked.
This is another reason to involve a private attorney early. Statements such as "she always let me track her before" or "we shared locations during the marriage" can have legal consequences when they are given without considering the statutory revocation rules.
What Are The Penalties For A Florida Tracking Device Charge?
A standard violation of § 934.425 is now a third-degree felony. A third-degree felony is generally punishable by up to five years of imprisonment, and Florida law permits a fine of up to $5,000.
The law provides a more serious classification when the tracking violation is committed to commit or facilitate a "dangerous crime" identified under § 907.041(5)(a). Under that circumstance, § 934.425 classifies the offense as a second-degree felony. A second-degree felony can carry as much as 15 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000.
The statutory maximum is not the same thing as saying every defendant will receive that sentence. Criminal history, sentencing scores, accompanying charges, facts alleged by the prosecution, mitigation, plea negotiations, and other sentencing considerations can affect the outcome.
The felony classification also makes the long-term consequences important. A conviction can affect employment, professional opportunities, background checks, firearms rights, immigration matters for noncitizens, and other parts of a person's life. My goal as a private defense attorney would be to identify grounds for dismissal first, then pursue reduction of the charge or penalties when dismissal cannot be achieved.
Other Florida Charges That May Accompany A Tracking Device Allegation
A tracking investigation does not always remain limited to § 934.425. Prosecutors may examine the surrounding conduct to determine whether another criminal statute may apply.
Florida Statute § 784.048 addresses stalking and aggravated stalking. Florida law defines harassment in that context as a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress and serves no legitimate purpose. Depending on the facts, repeated location monitoring combined with communications, appearances at locations, threats, or other conduct could become part of a stalking investigation.
Florida's trespass statutes may also become relevant if police claim someone entered private property to install or retrieve a tracking device. Section 810.09, for example, addresses willful entry onto or remaining on certain property without authorization when statutory notice or other specified conditions exist.
Section 934.03 may arise in a different type of electronic-surveillance case if the technology allegedly intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communications rather than merely reporting location. Location tracking and interception are not automatically the same offense, so I would examine precisely what the device did rather than allowing separate forms of surveillance to be treated as interchangeable.
Defenses A Florida Criminal Defense Attorney May Raise
The appropriate defense depends on what the State can actually prove. Digital evidence often looks definitive until the underlying records, permissions, ownership history, device configuration, and account access are examined.
Potential defense issues may include:
- You had consent to install, place, or use the device or application at the relevant time.
- You owned or leased the vehicle and satisfied the requirements of the statutory vehicle exception.
- Your conduct fell within another exception specifically recognized by § 934.425.
- The prosecution cannot prove that you knowingly installed, placed, or used the tracking technology.
- The State cannot reliably establish that you were the person who accessed the account or tracking information.
- The technology did not meet the statutory definition alleged by the prosecution.
- Police obtained digital or physical evidence through an unlawful search or seizure.
- Statements attributed to you were obtained in violation of your constitutional rights or do not mean what investigators claim they mean.
A private attorney can pursue more than one defense at the same time. I may challenge admissibility of evidence while also attacking intent, consent, identification, ownership, or the prosecution's interpretation of the device records.
Example of How I May Build the Defense
Consider an illustrative case in which a man is arrested after an electronic tracker is found under a vehicle primarily driven by his estranged spouse. Investigators discover that he originally purchased the vehicle, his name remains connected to the tracking account, and he previously admitted knowing the vehicle had location technology. At first glance, police may treat those facts as enough to support the charge.
I would not stop there. I would obtain the title and financing records, determine exactly who owned or leased the vehicle during each relevant period, subpoena account-access information where appropriate, establish when the tracker was installed, determine whether location access continued automatically, and review communications showing what each person had previously authorized. I would also establish the date any dissolution petition or protective proceeding was filed because that may affect consent under the statute.
Suppose the technical records then show that the tracker was installed while my client was the sole owner, that the other driver knew it was present, and that the location account had not actually been accessed by my client after consent was revoked. Those facts could materially weaken the prosecution's theory. Depending on the evidence, I could seek dismissal, challenge probable cause, argue that the statutory elements cannot be proven, or use the weaknesses in the State's case to pursue a reduced charge or reduced penalties.
This example is illustrative and is not presented as a claim concerning a particular Musca Law case or past result. Every tracking case depends upon its own evidence, and past results cannot determine what will happen in another person's case.
Florida Criminal Defense Attorney FAQs About Tracking Device And Tracking App Charges
Can I Be Charged If I Did Not Personally Install The Tracker?
Yes, depending on the facts. Florida's current statute does not only prohibit knowingly installing or placing tracking technology on another person's property without consent. It also prohibits knowingly using a tracking device or application to determine another person's location or movement, or the location or movement of that person's property, without consent.
That means the prosecution could potentially focus on alleged monitoring even when someone else physically attached or installed the device. I would examine whether you actually accessed the tracking information, whether another person had your account credentials, whether the device produced automatic notifications, and whether the digital evidence reliably identifies you as the user.
What If The Person Previously Gave Me Permission To Track Them?
Prior consent may be extremely important, but I would need to determine whether that consent remained in effect when the alleged offense occurred. Consent may have been limited to a specific device, particular purpose, certain period of time, or particular property, and evidence concerning those limitations can become important.
Florida law also expressly presumes consent revoked in certain circumstances involving a dissolution-of-marriage filing or specified injunction filings. Because of that provision, relying on consent that existed earlier in a relationship can be dangerous without examining exactly when the alleged tracking occurred.
What If I Own The Vehicle?
Ownership can be highly significant because § 934.425 contains a specific exception involving owners and lessees of motor vehicles. The exception is not simply a blanket rule that ownership makes every form of tracking legal, however, because the statute includes conditions concerning the ownership or lease period, transfer of title, lease expiration, removal, and specified circumstances in which the technology can remain.
I would obtain the actual title, registration, lease, financing documents, and other ownership records. If two people disagree over who had lawful authority over a vehicle, documentary evidence may be much more useful than informal descriptions of who considered the car "mine" or "ours."
Can Police Search My Phone In A Tracking Device Investigation?
Police may seek evidence from a phone because location applications, Bluetooth records, account histories, text messages, purchase receipts, photographs, and other data can become relevant. Whether law enforcement can lawfully search the device depends upon the circumstances, including whether officers have a warrant, whether valid consent was given, and what legal authority supports the search.
I would examine the warrant or asserted exception and compare the scope of the search with the authority officers actually possessed. If evidence was obtained through an unconstitutional search or seizure, suppression litigation may substantially change the prosecution's case.
Why Should I Hire A Private Attorney Before Speaking With Detectives?
Tracking investigations frequently depend on intent, consent, ownership, timing, and technology. A seemingly harmless explanation can unintentionally supply investigators with an element they were previously unable to establish, such as knowledge of the device, knowledge of its location, or admission that you accessed the information.
Hiring a private attorney allows the evidence to be examined before important decisions are made. I can communicate with investigators and prosecutors when appropriate, preserve favorable records, challenge digital evidence, identify applicable statutory exceptions, and work toward dismissal, reduction of the offense, or reduction of the potential penalties based on the circumstances of the case.
Contact A Florida Criminal Defense Attorney About A Tracking Device Or Tracking App Charge
A tracking-device investigation can develop into a felony case involving phones, vehicle records, cloud accounts, relationship history, protective orders, location histories, and allegations of additional criminal conduct. Getting involved early gives me an opportunity to determine whether the State can prove lack of consent, knowing installation or use, proper identification, and the absence of a statutory exception before important evidence disappears or damaging statements are made.
Contact Musca Law 24/7/365 at 1-888-484-5057 For Your FREE Consultation. Musca Law, P.A. has a team of experienced criminal defense attorneys dedicated to defending people charged with a criminal or traffic offense. We are available 24/7/365 at 1-888-484-5057 for your FREE consultation. We have 35 office locations throughout the state of Florida and serve all counties in Florida, including Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa, Orlando, St. Petersburg, Hialeah, Port St. Lucie, Cape Coral, Tallahassee, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Gainesville, Clearwater, Lakeland, Hollywood, Pembroke Pines, Fort Myers, Naples, Daytona Beach, and Pensacola, the Florida Panhandle, and every county in Florida.