In a sampling of decisions from other courts since United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012) was decided, it is apparent that the legal theories discussed in Jones, including Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion and the concurring opinions by Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor, are shaping the way courts are analyzing these issues. Predictably, the divergent opinions have produced varying results.¹ In several factually similar cases, the respective courts employed both the Scalia test (determining whether a “common law trespass” by government resulting in the gathering of evidence occurred); and the “reasonable expectation of privacy” analysis from Katz that was reiterated by Alito. These cases acknowledge that a majority of the justices do not think the trespass test provides an adequate analysis for protection of Fourth Amendment interests where global positioning system (GPS) monitoring is used, so they also analyze whether the defendants had a reasonable expectation of privacy.