Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR)

You are being tracked

In a report released last week, the ACLU describes in chilling detail the rapidly expanding law enforcement use of automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) systems nationwide. Originally designed to automatically scan surrounding vehicle plates for comparison against a “hot list” of wanted vehicles – such as those reported stolen or owned by a person for whom an arrest warrant was outstanding – ALPR devices have now become a seemingly indispensable investigative tool. While law enforcement use of emerging technologies is not in itself a problematic practice, how those tools are used can be of great concern.

How it works

While the underlying algorithms that make ALPR possible can be highly complex, the basic technological principles are fairly straight forward. Essentially the technology involves a camera, a computer, and a piece of software designed to “read” any vehicle license plates picked up by the camera. Mounted on police cruisers or road fixtures such as overpasses or street lights, sets of connected cameras can effectively scan the license plates of every vehicle within range.

While one or two such systems pose relatively little threat to everyday privacy, hundreds of such cameras are now active all over LA County and are being used by the LAPD, the LA County Sheriff, and the California Highway patrol. Together, the accumulated data from all these sources (all of which is shared between departments and even the Federal government through a backend server system known as BOSS) can be mined by law enforcement and the results used to paint a picture of the movements of any citizen who drives on public roads – going back months or even years into the past.

ALPR grows up

Originally developed in England as an offshoot of the massive public surveillance camera system long in use there, ALPR was first put to practical use in the late 1970s. However, despite its early potential, the prohibitive cost of computing and camera equipment made widespread use of the technology impractical until the last decade. Broad public knowledge of the practice is still underdeveloped. News reports were covering ALPR back in 2006, including an article published in Wired; but even at that relatively late date, the more nefarious aspects of the technology were still all but unknown. Even the ACLU is quoted in that article as being unconcerned about the practice at the time stating that there had been no legal challenge because the activity was not illegal – what a difference a few years can make.

Lost cost digital storage and the rise of privacy concerns

Much has changed since 2006 to make ALPR technology a much bigger concern today than it was just a few years ago. Of primary concern is the rapidly decreasing cost of huge computer storage capacity. Once a barrier to privacy invasion, digital storage technologies now allow law enforcement to maintain the records of their scans indefinitely; a possibility many agencies are all too happy to embrace. In the early days, hits were only scanned against a short list of “hot” vehicles. Today, everything has changed. Now, every single scan is logged into a database with some jurisdictions storing more plate data points per year then there are residents under their protection. What was once a benign police tool has now become every bit as controversial as the NSA phone surveillance program revealed earlier this year.

Indefinite storage

While police agencies tout the many legitimate uses of the ALPR technology, privacy concerns about the system stem not from its legitimate uses but largely from the length of time for which collected data is retained. Because every scanned plate is logged and stored in the database, Los Angeles streets are effectively under nearly permanent video surveillance. In the absence of any statewide regulation, agency privacy protections vary dramatically between institutions. The LAPD, for example, apparently holds the data for approximately two years, even on entirely innocent individuals. While the department has been hesitant to respond to ACLU records requests, written procedures appear to allow for data retention even of information not linked to any crime.

Dragnet

ALPR Camera Dragnet

Perhaps worse, no warrant is typically needed to mine the data, most of which is statistically worthless to law enforcement. Even in large jurisdictions such as LA County, the ACLU report reveals that less than one percent of the plate data recorded ever leads to any meaningful police action. The problem, however, is that location data, especially location data over long periods of time, can tell a great deal about personal behaviors. Which doctor you visit, what church you attend, which political rallies you have marched with, what friends you keep, which streets you take to work each day; all of this and much more can be gleaned from the plate databases of the LAPD alone. Even more troublesome is the fact that much of the data is stored by private companies with clear profit motives and that there are few, if any, access guidelines attached to the data. In short, it may be that anyone can access your location data at any time, even for commercial purposes.

How to protect yourself

In effect, your entire vehicle related paperwork is being continually monitored without your knowledge by most local law enforcement agencies in the LA area. To protect yourself it is critical that you make absolutely sure that your DMV paper work is complete and up to date. Maintain car insurance, make sure your registration is current, and keep up on your car payments. Any slip could give officers potential probable cause to pull you over and from there even a complete search of you and your vehicle is a possibility.

Gang Allegations

Street gangs

Criminal street gangs represent a serious problem for police departments all across California. While the numbers vary widely, FBI estimates rank Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties as first and third in the nation respectively for numbers of gangs and gang members. With an estimated gang population of more than 68,000 in Los Angeles county alone, as of 2011, it is not hard to see why law enforcement and the district attorney’s office take such a hard stance against suspected gang related criminal behavior. However, as the FBI threat assessment report is quick to point out, numbers do not tell the whole story and there is not necessarily a direct correlation between gang population and rates of criminal activity.

A number of factors can warp the impression given by the numbers alone and it is important to take in a more full perspective before jumping to conclusions. But, whatever the political ramifications of the numbers, gang allegations are perhaps most serious for those defendants facing gang related criminal charges.

Two gang laws?

First passed in 1988 (and later amended by proposition 21 in 2000) California’s STEP Act both criminalizes participation in a gang and enhances the sentence of defendants convicted of committing a crime on behalf of an active gang. While this might seem like a distinction without a difference, the penalties associated with each offense are dramatically different. Let’s look at each independently to better understand this area of law. A gang is defined as an association with three or more people who have as a primary activity the commission of any one or more of a list of 25 specifically enumerated crimes, share a common name, and who show a pattern – meaning 2 or more – of criminal behavior.

Part (a) – gang participation

Under section 186.22(a) of California’s penal code, it is a crime to actively and knowingly participate in the activities of a street gang. A violation of this code section carries a variable penalty ranging from one to three years. Gang participation may be charged in addition to any charge related more directly to the specific offence at issue.

Part (b) – gang enhancement

Under section 186.22(b), a defendant can be charged with, in addition to the above, the crime of furthering the interests of a criminal street gang. Under this part of the code, a defendant can face up to an additional 10 years of jail time for any crimes which are knowingly committed in association with, or for the benefit of, a street gang. In other words, part (b) is a rider, which adds substantially to the sentence of any person convicted of an underlying crime and also convicted under the gang enhancement section.

In addition, there is a firearms provision which, if successfully prosecuted in conjunction with the gang enhancement against any member of a group under consideration, can add up to 25 years to a sentence depending on the underlying nature of the alleged crime. For example, if three members of a gang are each convicted of robbery and also convicted under the gang enhancement provision, and one of the members of the group used a gun to assist in the robbery, additional time can be added to the sentence of each of the three convicted participants even if the other two were unarmed during the robbery.

An allegation is not a conviction

Given the large gang problem facing many parts of California, it is perhaps to be expected that some prosecutors will overzealously pursue gang enhancement or participation charges against criminals for whom such charges are not appropriate. This is why it is critical to remember that a charge is not a conviction. Gang add-ons can very often be fought, and the charges reduced or even dropped entirely with the right legal help. There are a number of defenses to gang charges. The gang enhancement codes require the prosecution to prove a relatively complex set of variables including, for example, that a defendant knew that the crime was for the benefit of a gang, that the gang had a pattern of criminal behavior, that the defendant knew the group was a gang, and that the defendant intended the crime to further the gang’s interests.

In addition, as in every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove every element to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest burden under the law. If you are facing a gang enhancement, or any other criminal charge, contact a qualified and experienced criminal attorney as soon as possible to ensure that your legal rights are not jeopardized.