In May 2019, an armed robbery occurred at a credit union in Midlothian, Virginia. The perpetrator, Okello Chatrie, managed to steal $195,000 using threats of violence. Despite police efforts, the investigation stalled until detectives utilized a geofence warrant to request data from Google regarding cell phones near the crime scene during the time of the robbery. This warrant allowed officers to pinpoint Chatrie's location prior to and after the incident using his Google Location History. Though he ultimately pleaded guilty and was sentenced to nearly 12 years in prison, Chatrie has contested the lawfulness of the geofence warrant that led to his identification, arguing it violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. As the case reaches the Supreme Court, the justices are weighing the implications of modern technology on constitutional liberties. Central to their consideration is whether geofence warrants meet the legal standards of specificity required by the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits broad and general searches. This case is significant as it marks an ongoing debate over the intersection of technology and legal protections, echoing the Court's past rulings about electronic surveillance. The outcome of the ruling could set a precedent affecting law enforcement's access to digital data throughout the country, balancing public safety against individuals' privacy rights.