Category Archives: Cell phones

D.Idaho: Cellphone warrant was not sufficiently particular and is suppressed; Gmail account not suppressed

The Google email search warrant was sufficiently particular to narrow the search to documents pertaining to a particular land transaction. The search warrant for defendant’s Apple phone and accounts, however, was insufficiently particular and is suppressed. The affidavit attempted to … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, E-mail, Particularity | Comments Off on D.Idaho: Cellphone warrant was not sufficiently particular and is suppressed; Gmail account not suppressed

D.Conn.: That accomplices communicated by text messaging justified SW for cell phone

This cell phone was with probable cause and was particular. “Here, the warrant affidavits clearly established probable cause to conclude that Sinisterra was involved in all three shootings described therein. He was implicated by two individuals who corroborated each other … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Probable cause, Staleness | Comments Off on D.Conn.: That accomplices communicated by text messaging justified SW for cell phone

Reason: Yes, Warrants Allow a Search Through the Whole Phone

Reason: Yes, Warrants Allow a Search Through the Whole Phone by Orin S. Kerr (“A comment on a mistaken way to limit computer searches— focusing on People v. Carson from the Michigan Court of Appeals.”):

Posted in Cell phones, Scope of search | Comments Off on Reason: Yes, Warrants Allow a Search Through the Whole Phone

NY2: SW for def’s cell phone browser history lacked PC, but here it was harmless error

“The defendant correctly contends that the police search of his browsing history and URLs of his Blackberry cell phone was not authorized by the search warrant obtained by the police. ‘To establish probable cause, a search warrant must provide sufficient … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Probable cause, Scope of search | Comments Off on NY2: SW for def’s cell phone browser history lacked PC, but here it was harmless error

D.N.M.: Accidental finding of A-C communications in cell phone search was not intentional and did not compromise defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel

Defendant’s Apple cell phone was searched with a warrant, and the contents were shared with defense counsel even before the government completed its own review. It was discovered that there were attorney-client communications on the phone, and the government immediately … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges, Taint team | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Accidental finding of A-C communications in cell phone search was not intentional and did not compromise defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel

D.P.R.: Cut-and-paste error that misidentified iPhone model overlooked by correct phone number

The search warrant was for a specific phone number on an iPhone 6S, but the phone with that number was an iPhone 13. Still, the phone number controlled, and the search was valid. Alternatively, on the totality, defendant consented to … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, General warrant, Private search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Cut-and-paste error that misidentified iPhone model overlooked by correct phone number

VA: Capias for detention of person not functional equivalent of arrest warrant; no PC finding

A Virginia capias for detention of a person is not the functional equivalent of an arrest warrant founded on sworn probable cause. The police view of the inside of defendant’s home that led to a search warrant is suppressed. Commonwealth … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Cell phones, Cell site location information, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on VA: Capias for detention of person not functional equivalent of arrest warrant; no PC finding

CA8: Affiant officer’s belief that criminals brag about crimes on social media allows cell phone search in a gun case

“We conclude the affidavit adequately established probable cause that Ivey’s cell phone would contain evidence of a firearms offense. Officers found the phone in Ivey’s possession while he was located in a vehicle with a gun under his seat. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Dog sniff, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Social media warrants, Standing | Comments Off on CA8: Affiant officer’s belief that criminals brag about crimes on social media allows cell phone search in a gun case

N.D.Ga.: Use of cell phone cash app to facilitate PPP fraud justified SW for phone

Use of a cell phone cash app to facilitate spending PPP loan fraud justified warrant for phone. United States v. Foster, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11369 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 22, 2024). Codefendant’s case: United States v. Baptiste, 2024 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Excessive force, Probable cause, Qualified immunity, Scope of search | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Use of cell phone cash app to facilitate PPP fraud justified SW for phone

DE: The PC for cell phone was limited to search history; SW otherwise overbroad

Defendant was accused of sexual contact with a four-year-old girl he was caring for. Her mother kicked him out of the house and sought a forensic exam of the child. A couple of days later, she found his cell phone … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Prison and jail searches, Warrant papers | Comments Off on DE: The PC for cell phone was limited to search history; SW otherwise overbroad

Cal.5: Defective notice of Facebook warrant under CalECPA doesn’t require suppression

Defendant’s Facebook account was accessed by a search warrant issued under CalECPA. The notice provision was not complied with by the state, but the court declines to suppress here. The standard for suppression in CalECPA is the same as for … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Computer and cloud searches, Informant hearsay, Social media warrants, Warrant execution | Comments Off on Cal.5: Defective notice of Facebook warrant under CalECPA doesn’t require suppression

GA: Question in inventory was whether it was reasonable, not whether it was necessary

The question in inventory was whether it was reasonable, not whether it was necessary. Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress. McAnnally v. State, 2024 Ga. App. LEXIS 19 (Jan. 18, 2024). The prolonged retention of defendant’s cell … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Inventory, Scope of search | Comments Off on GA: Question in inventory was whether it was reasonable, not whether it was necessary

N.D.Fla.: No standing against tracking a stolen cell phone

Defendant claimed a Brady violation for failure to disclose a Stingray device was used to track the victim’s cell phone in his possession. It’s not. Moreover, defendant doesn’t even have standing in a stolen cell phone. Bass v. Dixon, 2023 … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, GPS / Tracking Data, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Fla.: No standing against tracking a stolen cell phone

D.Mass.: Inevitable discovery applies to def giving up passcode to cell phone

Inevitable discovery applies to defendant giving up the passcode to his cell phone by a statement he challenged. The government had an independent basis to get into the phone to search it. United States v. Xiaolei Wu, 2024 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Scope of search | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Inevitable discovery applies to def giving up passcode to cell phone

DE: Cell tower dump was reasonable under 4A

Defendant was convicted of robbery and kidnapping of a woman from her apartment complex to go to her ATM machine. Police got cell tower dumps for the nearest towers to the occurrence at the specific times to locate cell phones … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Ineffective assistance, Seizure | Comments Off on DE: Cell tower dump was reasonable under 4A

OH11: Running passenger’s ID through database didn’t violate Rodriguez

With no Ohio cases on point, looking to federal cases, the court concludes that running the passenger’s ID too was incidental to the stop and didn’t unreasonably extend it. State v. Foti, 2024-Ohio-39, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 47 (11th Dist. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on OH11: Running passenger’s ID through database didn’t violate Rodriguez

Cal.6: SW for fingerprint to unlock cell phone wasn’t unreasonable under 4A or testimonial compulsion under 5A

The officers here got a search warrant which required defendant to submit to unlocking his cell phone with his fingerprint. They opened the phone, but then it locked and they needed a second warrant to unlock it again. The affidavit … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Privileges | Comments Off on Cal.6: SW for fingerprint to unlock cell phone wasn’t unreasonable under 4A or testimonial compulsion under 5A

N-M: 94-day delay in getting cell phone SW was unreasonable; GFE not applicable

The search of defendant’s iPhones and iPads lacked probable cause at the time it happened. His wife had apparent authority to search because she knew the passcodes but that doesn’t equate to her apparent authority to seize them. Also, the … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Computer and cloud searches, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion, Military searches, Reasonableness | Comments Off on N-M: 94-day delay in getting cell phone SW was unreasonable; GFE not applicable

NY Kings Co.: The logic that people always have their cell phones on them is enough for nexus to get this SW

Defendant was arrested two days after a shooting. A search warrant was obtained for his cell phone. He resisted because there was no allegation he had the phone on him at the time of the shooting. Essentially, people always have … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Nexus | Comments Off on NY Kings Co.: The logic that people always have their cell phones on them is enough for nexus to get this SW

M.D.Pa.: Cut-and-paste errors and delay in execution and discovery results in suppression of cell phone

A Franks violation from cut-and-paste of another cell phone search affidavit resulted in serious factual errors in this one. Coupled with the government’s late disclosure of the phone’s contents despite a date certain trial, the court concludes the exclusionary rule … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on M.D.Pa.: Cut-and-paste errors and delay in execution and discovery results in suppression of cell phone