Defendant sought writ relief after his motions to suppress a “geofence” warrant and to set aside the information were denied. The Court of Appeal denies the writ, finding the warrant “satisfied the probable cause and particularity requirements of the Fourth Amendment and was not overbroad; it was reasonably and narrowly drawn in geographic scope and time period to capture the location data of only suspects and witnesses.” The court also finds the People’s violations of CalECPA’s notice requirements (PC 1546.2) do not require suppression because successive notice extensions would have been granted had the People asked.
^