It's only 34 pages, don't be a pussy.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf
This is a tricky one because most people are reading it as a win for privacy when it's really really not. They used the reasoning that there was a tresspass at common law when affixing the beeper to be the key issue, not that one has an expectation of privacy.
The Government’s attachment of the GPS device to the vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements, constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. Pp. 3–12.
(a)The Fourth Amendment protects the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
Here, the Government’s physical intrusion on an “effect” for the purpose of obtaining information constitutes a “search.” This type of encroachment on an area enumeratedin the Amendment would have been considered a search within the meaning of the Amendment at the time it was adopted. Pp. 3–4.