Independent public-information projectNot the official LVMPD website. Taxpayer-funded, not affiliated with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. Official services at lvmpd.comNot the official LVMPD site · lvmpd.comEmergency 911 · Non-emergency 311
LVMPD INFOLVMPD Public Information
Official LVMPD site ↗

GPS ankle monitors

Supervision

Last reviewed: 2026-10-27Legal review: unverifiedCapability or investigative question
Evidence rule

This page is public-interest research. An argument grade is not a court finding. A watchdog page describes the device. It is not proof a Nevada agency bought it or turned a feature on. A product description is not a Nevada practice. Agencies are not merged: the City of Las Vegas Department of Public Safety, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, the Clark County School District, the City of Reno, and the Nevada Department of Public Safety stay separate. A hotlist hit is not a confirmed crime. Legal review of this page is unverified.

What it does

A GPS ankle monitor is a bracelet that reports the wearer’s location to a supervision vendor or agency. It is the wearable form of electronic monitoring. Alerts fire when the person leaves an allowed area or enters a forbidden one. The points can be stored as a full track, not only as alerts.

Privacy watchdog concerns

No watchdog page is attached.

Constitutional issues

Analogical constitutional argument

Fourth Amendment, Nevada Constitution art. 1, § 18

Warrant practice not established for a Nevada agency

GPS ankle monitors: No Nevada ankle-monitor contract is in this build. Jones is not a holding about a court-ordered bracelet. Carpenter does not decide it.

  • United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012). Analogical constitutional argument. United States Supreme Court. Jones decided a GPS device attached to a vehicle without the owner’s consent in the circumstances of that case. An ankle monitor ordered by a court is a different fact. The analogy is not the holding.
  • Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018). Does not decide this technology. United States Supreme Court. Carpenter does not decide an ankle monitor.

Statutes attached to read, not findings.

  • NRS Chapter 239. Nevada public-records law is the route to ask for contracts, policies, and logs. Citing it is not a finding that a surveillance practice is unlawful.
  • Nevada Constitution art. 1, § 18. State search-and-seizure provision. This page does not quote the section. No section anchor was verified. It is listed only where a search question is actually implicated.
  • 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A civil remedy for a deprivation of federal rights under color of state law. It is not a warrant statute, and it does not itself make a surveillance practice unlawful.

Nevada use

Not documented on this page.

Capability only.

See also: Electronic monitoring

Next record

GPS ankle monitors: Do not describe a secret tracking program from a supervision device.

All devices. A document workflow for this page is not built. The arrest correction form is not a surveillance-document inbox. Corrections and source documents for this page follow the corrections policy. Corrections policy.