No, because criminals have learned since cases like Dellen Millard's not to go to the crime scene with even a burner phone. I was just citing it as an example.
Any unusual behaviour is evidence. For example, it is suspicious that the Nightwalker came and went, that same evening in the upscale neighbourhood, without leaving phone signals.
In the Idaho 4 case, an often cited piece of evidence against Kohberger was that he turned his phone off, just as he left his residence, and turned it back on after the crime. I believe we'll.see this brought in as evidence in the upcoming trial against Suzanne Morphew's husband. The guy never turned off his phone, except just before Suzanne's own phone stopped bring used.
It also came up in the evidence against the Delphi killer - his phone didn't ping in the area of the crime. He admitted he was there, yet slipped up and said he was using it. Again, why turn it off except to hide your presence? LE also cited as evidence that he'd apparently kept all his old phones, except for the one he'd owned at the time of the crime.
IMO, unless someone exists without a phone at all, once they're suspected and LE can therefore get a warrant to seize their phone, a lot of lies are exposed indirectly.