New Ruling Allows Police to Search Phones Without Warrant

To the possible dismay of criminal defense and constitutional law attorneys across the United States, a California judge ruled Monday that police in the state of California may search an arrested individual’s phone. The ruling allows police to search any data that is kept on an arrested person’s phone. Under the ruling data is considered to include texts, emails, photos, web browsing history, address books or other data stored on the phone. The ruling only affects California law.

The new ruling was given on Monday by a Superior Court judge in Ventura County, California. In explaining the ruling, the judge issuing the opinion said that an individual’s right to privacy is lost upon arrest and the loss of privacy is extended to include personal property “immediately associated with the person of the arrestee at the time of the arrest.”

The ruling stems from a 2007 drug deal case. A Ventura County Sheriff witnessed a drug deal that involved a car driven by a suspect. The suspect and his passenger were arrested and six pills of Ecstasy were obtained. The arrested driver was taken to a police station and his phone was seized. The driver denied any involvement with the drug deal during his interview with police. A police deputy then reviewed text messages contained on the phone and found one message that said “6 4 80” which the officer interpreted to mean “Six pills of Ecstasy for $80.” The deputy then challenged the driver’s previous story and showed him the text message. The driver then admitted to the drug deal.

The ruling allows police in California to review any data stored on an arrested person’s phone including voicemails, chat conversations and more. Responding to the decision, a representative from the American Civil Liberties Union said that it is unclear whether police can copy information from an arrested person’s phone and that police cannot force an individual to unlock their phone without a judge’s order.

Source: CNN, “Ruling Lets California Police Search Your Phone Without a Warrant,” Amy Gahran, 1/5/11

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.