The data generated by Internet of Things devices is increasingly being introduced as evidence in court. The first US case involving the introduction of medical data from a pacemaker as evidence of arson and insurance fraud was State of Ohio v Compton. The purpose of this article is three-fold. First, the article explores this case, looking in particular at the facts of the case and the charges brought against the defendant. Second, the article critically examines the decision of the trial court judge during the suppression hearing for the evidence from the pacemaker. In this hearing, the judge ruled that the search and seizure did not violate the Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant and allowed the pacemaker data to be entered as evidence against him. Third, the article considers the implications of this decision for future cases involving Internet of Things (IoT) medical data. Ultimately, the constitutional protections of IoT medical device data and the circumstances under which the data from these devices will be collected and used as evidence, are issues that currently demand the attention of legal and digital forensics professionals and warrant public debate.