Alec Schott, of Houston, won a $76 judgment against Bexar County and its sheriff in Texas after a federal jury found that his traffic stop and truck search were connected to information from an automated vehicle license plate reader system and to a traffic violation that a deputy sheriff later acknowledged had not occurred.
The incident took place in March 2022, when Schott was returning from a work trip to Carrizo Springs. Deputy Joel Babb stopped him for what was described as drifting out of his lane, but his subsequent testimony indicated that the real reason was a message in a WhatsApp group dedicated to law enforcement. The message said that Schott’s truck had made a round trip within a single day, a pattern that an unknown source considered suspicious.
According to the lawsuit filing, the source known as “Kiki” was allegedly working with a federal information fusion center in Laredo and had near-instant access to automated license plate reader data. The deputy considered the short trip sufficient to raise suspicion of possible smuggling, even though Schott worked selling oilfield supplies.
From Suspicion to Search
Schott said the deputy told him that he was working in a criminal interdiction unit investigating human and drug trafficking. Dashboard-camera footage showed, according to the Institute for Justice, which assisted him in the case, that he had not changed lanes as alleged. Nor did his answers during the stop, according to the institute, justify treating him as a suspect.
A police dog was called, and Schott was held for 76 minutes while his truck was searched completely. Authorities found nothing, although the dog gave an alert; the institute says the handler’s body-camera recording shows that he gestured to the dog immediately before the alert.
Schott sought symbolic damages of $1 for every minute he was detained, which is why the judgment amounted to $76. His lawyers said the primary goal was to challenge the constitutionality of using stops unsupported by facts as a means of conducting a search without a warrant. They intend to ask the court to bar Bexar County from continuing this practice and to seek application of the precedent statewide.
What Does the Case Reveal About License Plate Readers?
The case alone does not establish that the license plate reader system made a specific technical error, but it shows how automated information or an ordinary travel pattern can become a justification for police intervention when human review and clear limits are absent. The practical risk is not limited to data collection; it also extends to how the data are interpreted and linked to field decisions affecting people’s freedom and privacy.
Jake Laperruque, deputy director of the Security and Surveillance Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology, said the case represents an example of the gap between promises by artificial intelligence technology vendors to improve public safety and the potential results when the technology is used without safeguards. He warned that license plate readers may threaten civil liberties, while also leading to improper stops of drivers or misuse of the technology by individual police officers.
The Bexar County Sheriff’s Office, which promotes the use of Flock Safety cameras, declined Ars Technica’s request for comment. Open questions remain concerning mechanisms for auditing data sources, standards for turning traffic patterns into suspicion, and responsibility when that data leads to a stop and search whose basis is not substantiated.