Skip to main content
Advertising

Originally published January 17, 2014 at 5:54 PM | Page modified January 17, 2014 at 6:34 PM

  • Share:
             
  • Comments (1)
  • Print

Supreme Court to consider limits of cellphone searches

In both cases, criminal defendants were convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms, at least in part on the strength of evidence obtained by warrantless searches of their cellphones.


Tribune Washington Bureau

Most Popular Comments
Hide / Show comments
if you don't carry a smartphone you have less to worry about. Besides, as a bonus... MORE

advertising

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court set the stage for an important Fourth Amendment ruling Friday, saying it will decide this term whether police may inspect a suspect’s cellphone without a search warrant when they make an arrest.

Courts in California and Massachusetts have split on the issue, and the justices agreed to hear cases from both states. In each case, criminal defendants were convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms, at least in part on the strength of evidence obtained by warrantless searches of their cellphones.

When police officers arrest a motorist, they are usually free to check around the car for guns, drugs or other items, including papers or notebooks. Citing this principle, some judges have said officers may also look through a cellphone to see where calls were made.

But other judges have said cellphones can hold a wealth of personal information, such as photos, contacts, emails and texts, that should be protected as private, at least until an officer obtains a search warrant.

The court will hear an appeal from David Riley, a San Diego man who was stopped by the police, initially for having expired registration tags. A subsequent search of his cellphone tied him to a gang shooting. The California Supreme Court, in a 5-2 decision, upheld the search of cellphones in a related case.

The court will also hear the Justice Department’s appeal of a ruling that rejected the search of a cellphone taken from an alleged drug dealer in a Boston case.

In that case, a federal appeals court said the warrantless, but limited, search of an older flip phone violated the Fourth Amendment. After arresting Brima Wurie on suspicion of selling crack, police eventually examined the call log on his flip phone and used the information to determine where he lived.

When they searched his home, armed with a warrant, they found crack, marijuana, a gun and ammunition. The evidence was enough to produce a conviction and a prison term of more than 20 years.

Both cases will be argued in April.

Material from The Associated Press is included in this report.



News where, when and how you want it

Email Icon

Bake cookies for a cause

Bake cookies for a cause

Get 23 scrumptious recipes in our "Quintessential Cookies" e-book. One dollar of your $3.95 purchase goes to Fund For The Needy.

Advertising

Partner Video

Advertising


Advertising
The Seattle Times

The door is closed, but it's not locked.

Take a minute to subscribe and continue to enjoy The Seattle Times for as little as 99 cents a week.

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Subscriber login ►