Law360 (October 5, 2026, 3:50 PM EDT) -- A New Jersey appeals court has ruled that police were incorrectly granted a geofence warrant because their application failed to establish a "nexus" between a string of gas station robberies and a potential suspect's cellphone location data.

The three judge panel on Friday ruled that Michael A. Hobbs should be allowed to suppress location data uncovered via that warrant, holding that police failed to establish probable cause in their geofence warrant application because it only contained general references to the ubiquity of cell phones.

"The fact that cell phones are common, and many people always carry them, does not by itself establish probable cause to search Google's Sensorvault," The unsigned opinion said. "If it did, police could seek geofence warrants in virtually every criminal investigation. That would drain the probable-cause requirement of meaning."

The court's per curiam unpublished opinion reversed the trial court's denial of Hobbs' motion to suppress evidence obtained through geofence warrants.

In January 2022, a string of very similar gas station robberies occurred over a period of days in Morris and Warren Counties. Witnesses offered similar details at each scene of a Black man driving a BMW X6 who asked for fuel and then demanded cash from the gas station attendant while brandishing a weapon, the opinion said.

Witnesses after the first night also reported seeing a second Black male, but also provided similar descriptions regarding the car and use of a weapon. A prosecutor with the Morris County Prosecutor's Office began investigating the case and applied for a Communications Data Warrant directed at Google, the opinion said.

The warrant sought Google Location History, a kind of location data that creates "a virtual journal of a user's movements," the opinion said. The warrant compels Google to turn over the data through a three-step warrant process in which Google works with police to identify cellphone users' location data.

A warrant affidavit from the Morris County Prosecutor's Office described the gas station robberies and said cell phone data could help the investigation. The affidavit did not describe how the crimes were tied to Google's records but rather how cell phones worked and how Google stores location data, the opinion said.

A state court judge approved the warrant and allowed the prosecutor's office to work with Google to locate cell phones in the robbery areas. Google provided data for three of the six locations, but a technical issue required a second warrant to turn over cell data for the remaining robbery locations, the opinion said.

A detective with the prosecutor's office analyzed the data that Google turned over and identified one user who was near each of the gas station locations at the time they were robbed. The detective asked Google to deanonymize the user, and Hobbs' name was given to the prosecutor's office, the opinion said.

A Morris County grand jury in July 2022 returned a 14-count indictment charging Hobbs with various counts of robbery, weapons possession, eluding and receiving stolen property. Hobbs moved to suppress evidence in his case, arguing that the geofence warrant was unconstitutionally broad, the opinion said.

A state court ruled that law enforcement structured its warrant to minimize intrusion and that investigators established probable cause to search Google data. Hobbs pled guilty following the denial of his suppression motion and was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment in February 2025, the opinion said.

The standard that geofence warrants require a showing of probable cause was clarified earlier this year. The U.S. Supreme Court in June of this year held that geofence warrants are "searches" for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment, and that users have an expectation of privacy. The high court ruled in Chatrie v. United States that lower courts are responsible for determining whether warrants are sufficiently particular and supported by probable cause, the opinion said.

Hobbs argued that prosecutors failed to establish probable cause that Google's servers had evidence that he committed the robberies. The motion court, instead, relied on the pervasiveness of cell phone ownership to support probable cause that Google could turn over data on Hobbs, the opinion said.

The appeals court on Friday held that the presumption that many people always carry their phone is not sufficient to search Google's location history data. The court also offered suggestions for ways in which prosecutors could have "strengthened" its warrant affidavit.

The opinion said that if the affidavit contained additional facts such as "an inference the suspects used cell phones to communicate with each other" during or after the crimes, investigators could have also relied on their "training and experience" to support probable cause.

A spokesperson for the Morris County Prosecutor's Office said they are reviewing their options for further appeals with the New Jersey Attorney General.

An attorney for Hobbs did not respond to a request for comment.

Judges Hany A. Mawla, Patrick DeAlmeida, and Mark K. Chase sat for the Superior Court of the State of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

The government is represented by Bethany L. Deal and Jennifer Davenport of the New Jersey Attorney General's Office.

Hobbs is represented by Margaret McLane and Jennifer N. Sellitti of the New Jersey Office of the Public Defender.

The case is State of New Jersey v. Michael A. Hobbs, case number A-2010-24 in the Superior Court of the State of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

--Editing by Vaqas Asghar.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.