Conference committee weighs expanded police drone use, lawmakers spar over warrant and missing-person language

A Minnesota legislative conference committee considering judiciary and public-safety budget language heard testimony on competing House and Senate provisions that would expand law-enforcement use of unmanned aerial vehicles, commonly called drones. The provisions appeared as additions to House File 1396 and Senate File 1665 and are being considered as part of House File 2432.

House counsel Jeff Diebold summarized the differences, saying the proposals diverge on four main points: whether a drone may be used to "document" evidence or to "preserve and protect" it; the standard for using drones to track fleeing suspects (probable cause in the House language versus a lower reasonable-belief/suspicion standard in the Senate draft); limits on using drones over private property with occupant consent; and whether drones may be used to search for missing people only in "active" searches that involve risk of death or bodily harm (House) or more broadly "to facilitate the search" (Senate).

The Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, represented by Jeff Potts, executive director, supported the House wording that the drone can…