Slashdot Mirror
Fed. Appeals Court Says Police Need Warrant to Search Phone
An anonymous reader writes "In a decision that's almost certainly going to result in this issue heading up to the Supreme Court, the Federal 1st Circuit Court of Appeals [Friday] ruled that police can't search your phone when they arrest you without a warrant. That's contrary to most courts' previous findings in these kinds of cases where judges have allowed warrantless searches through cell phones." (But in line with the recently mentioned decision in Florida, and seemingly with common sense.)
Really, for once the court seems to have a backbone. (Only once?)
It of course makes no sense that you can have a pile of papers and "edible looking items" in your car, and those are protected, but then there's your phone over there in the corner, "yay, it's electronic so the consitution doesn't apply!"
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Read the briefing...
They already had him on doing a drug sale, and the cell phone was searched after he was read his rights and his items were confiscated for booking.
It is kinda a grey area, but I'm happy this case is not about searching someone BEFORE any crime was committed & booked... rather, it was after he was arrested. There was also no password/encryption in use.
This does bring up a mixed feeling.... But i think the judge made the right call -- There was no immediate danger, or issue, that could justify bypassing the individuals rights. He was already in custody and being charged for a crime... His phone was safely in police custody and being processed to store. A judge should have reviewed the information and issued a warrant to search the phone.
If the crime was kidnapping, and the phone might have information on where to go to save someone's life.. I'd agree in a heartbeat that his phone should be searched immediately.. But this guy was being processed to go behind bars and nothing in the phone could have reasonably been useful to solve any immediate crises.
So you are fine with the police violating the rights of its citizens in arbitrary situations.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
All these exemptions to the constitution were instituted as exceptions to aid the war on drugs. The real enemy is the war on drugs and prohibition 2.0 should be abolished.
They already had him on doing a drug sale, and the cell phone was searched after he was read his rights and his items were confiscated for booking.
But in most jurisdictions, if they had taken his car while making the arrest, they would have had to get a search warrant before they started digging around in the car.
It seems only proper that they get a warrant for the phone. If it makes as much sense as you seem to imply, they would have no problem getting the warrant.
Unless they suspect there evidence in the car, they don't automatically have a valid reason to search it. Even if they believe there may be a trunk full of drugs, most police agencies will get the warrant just to be sure it stands up in court, because "suspecting there is evidence" has been found to be just too big of a loop-hole and has been so often abused that it is routinely thrown out. In fact in some jurisdictions, if they seize the car/phone, all emergency situations cease at that point and there is no longer exigent circumstance to search for drugs. Bombs, maybe, but drugs or cell phone data, not so much.
See: http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform-immigrants-rights-racial-justice/know-your-rights-what-do-if-you
As for "having him on Drug sales", I fail to see why that makes a difference. They already had is phone too. He wasn't going to be given a chance to wipe it.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.