BROADCASTS.com

b'A Hennepin County grand jury indicted appellant Nigeria Harvey with several offenses, including first-degree premeditated murder. As part of the police investigation, an officer obtained a court order directing Harvey\\u2019s cellular provider to disclose the cell site location information for Harvey\\u2019s phone during the time surrounding the murder. Before trial, Harvey filed two motions challenging the cell site location information. In the first motion, he argued the court should suppress the cell site location information because it was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. In the second motion, Harvey argued the cell site location information was inadmissible because the State failed to establish that the technology used to collect the information was accepted by the scientific community and that the technology had been applied in a manner to ensure reliability. The district court denied both motions. During jury selection, Harvey objected to the prosecutor\\u2019s use of a peremptory challenge, citing Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). The district court overruled Harvey\\u2019s objection. The jury found Harvey guilty of first-degree premeditated murder.\\n\\nOn appeal to the supreme court, the issues presented are: (1) whether the police obtained the cell site location information for Harvey\\u2019s phone in violation of the Fourth Amendment; (2) whether the district court erred when it admitted the cell site location information into evidence; and (3) whether the district court erred when it overruled Harvey\\u2019s Batson objection. (Hennepin County)'