SCOTUS To Weigh Smartphone Searches By Police

schwit1 writes "The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether police can search an arrested criminal suspect's cell phone without a warrant in two cases that showcase how the courts are wrestling to keep up with rapid technological advances. Taking up cases from California and Massachusetts arising from criminal prosecutions that used evidence obtained without a warrant, the high court will wade into how to apply older court precedent, which allows police to search items carried by a defendant at the time of arrest, to cell phones."

Comments

They should allow it

[TrollstonButterbeans]

If there is enough evidence for arrest, there is enough evidence to see what recent contact information, phone calls and text messages are on a cell phone.

This is how crime is done these days.

Probably an unpopular opinion to some, but this is how drug deals, flash mobs, knockout games and preplanned crimes are done.

No judge cares about your grocery list or calls to grandma.

They do care if your phone has a map to victim's house in the recent history.

Re:They should allow it

[Sarten-X]

Try again.

Let me explain to you what a warrant is, it's a check against unreasonable searches.

A search incident to a lawful arrest is not "unreasonable".

Re:They should allow it

[Sarten-X]

Don't take away my right to have a judge involved before the cops can even attempt to violate my rights

That's why there's arrest warrants. The judge is involved beforehand.

Of course, you can be detained or arrested without a warrant, if the police officer has probable cause to believe you committed a crime. In that case, you can challenge the arrest right off the bat. Then a judge is involved, and if the judge disagrees with the police, everything they have is excluded and the police department is ripe for a wrongful arrest lawsuit. that's real due process. You get a chance to defend yourself against accusations. You are presumed innocent until proven guilty. You do not get absolute freedom until judgement.

It's nice that you want 24-hour immediate access to a judge before every police action, but I want a pony. With respect, what makes you so important that your due process must be immediate, rather than speedy? If the on-call judge is busy with another call, then what? Does a burglar caught red-handed get to run away because the police have no warrant to arrest him?