Cell Phone Searches – Supreme Court to Rule on Warrant Requirement

Cell Phone Searches – Supreme Court

Update: “Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, concluding that a warrant is required to search a mobile phone.^[8] Roberts wrote that it fails the warrantless search test established in Chimel v. California.”

“The Supreme Court granted certiorari review in two similar cases, both used with evidence obtained by means of a warrantless search of a cell phone during a lawful arrest.

One friend has said, “Wow, the Supremes are taking a serious look at cell phone searches!There’s been talk for a while now about the problems courts have applying old standard to modern technology. We may get a sea change in S&S law.Of course, we may not, too, but it’s really worth watching. If you have a cell phone search case now, for goodness sake make your 4th Am motion and/or objections (track the language in these 2 cases).” Thanks DE for your thoughts on this issue.

In Riley v. California, No. 13-132, a state case, the question presented is:

Whether evidence admitted at petitioner’s trial was obtained in a search of petitioner’s cell phone violated petitioner’s Fourth Amendment rights.

In United States v. Wurie, No. 13-212, the Feds appealed, the question presented is:

Whether the Fourth Amendment permits the police, without obtaining a warrant, to review the call log of a cellphone found on a person who has been lawfully arrested.

The cases are Riley v. California, No. 13-132, and United States v. Wurie, No. 13-212.