Category Archives: Cell phones

MA: Cell “tower dumps” require SW on PC

Cell “tower dump” of all numbers connected to it requires a search warrant issued on probable cause. Here it was lacking. Commonwealth v. Perry, 2022 Mass. LEXIS 151 (Apr. 1, 2022):

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on MA: Cell “tower dumps” require SW on PC

N.D.Ga.: No standing from hiding a gun and clip in the breakfast area of a hotel

Defendant has no standing to contest police finding his gun and clip he hid in separate cabinets in the breakfast area of his hotel. United States v. Blakely, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59245 (N.D.Ga. Feb. 28, 2022),* adopted, 2022 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Emergency / exigency, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: No standing from hiding a gun and clip in the breakfast area of a hotel

S.D.N.Y.: Video of def and cell phone at scene of crime is PC for phone

Defendant with his cell phone in hand was at the scene of a shooting as shown by surveillance video. That’s probable cause for the phone. United States v. King, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53647 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 24, 2022). When the … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Cell phones, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Video of def and cell phone at scene of crime is PC for phone

WaPo: Cellphone dragnets can help catch criminals. Judges say they can also violate constitutional rights.

WaPo: Cellphone dragnets can help catch criminals. Judges say they can also violate constitutional rights. By Justin Jouvenal & Rachel Weiner (“Police requests for ‘geofence’ data showing active cellphones near crime scenes have skyrocketed.”)

Posted in Cell phones, geofence | Comments Off on WaPo: Cellphone dragnets can help catch criminals. Judges say they can also violate constitutional rights.

D.D.C.: No RS for sniff of luggage carried by Amtrak passenger

On the whole, there wasn’t reasonable suspicion for the dog sniff of the luggage they were carrying. Moreover, the court does not find they consented to it. The court declines to credit the testimony of the officer about nervousness and … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Mail and packages, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.D.C.: No RS for sniff of luggage carried by Amtrak passenger

NY Co.: SW for cell phone without time limitation was unreasonable

One search warrant for searching defendant’s phone with Cellebrite was without time limitation and was overbroad. People v. Gonzalez, 2022 NY Slip Op 22074, 2022 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 928 (N.Y.Co. Mar. 7, 2022). Defendant claimed his jail calls after 48 … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Overbreadth, Prison and jail searches, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on NY Co.: SW for cell phone without time limitation was unreasonable

D.Md.: Covid helped explain the delay in SW for cell phone search

This cell phone was reasonably seized under a warrant. The second warrant was issued a few weeks later, but, because of covid, the delay was reasonable. United States v. Reaves, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43243 (D.Md. Mar. 9, 2022). “Defendant … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.Md.: Covid helped explain the delay in SW for cell phone search

CO: Warrantless cell phone ping of wanted murderer was based on exigency

Defendant was a suspect in a murder that just happened captured on surveillance video where the deceased was executed by five shots to the head. The police recovered no weapon, and defendant was on the run. They sought a cell … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Surveillance technology | Comments Off on CO: Warrantless cell phone ping of wanted murderer was based on exigency

S.D.N.Y.: Seizing a cell phone in plain view with PC for later SW is reasonable

“[T]he court must conclude that probable cause existed to seize Kurland’s phone at the time of his arrest and that the plain view exception permitted the government to seize it. To be sure: simply seeing a device in plain view … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Seizing a cell phone in plain view with PC for later SW is reasonable

FL4: Prosr’s argument def refused to give password to phone violated 4A

“The trial court erred in denying Appellant’s motion in limine and allowing the State to present evidence and argument referencing Appellant’s refusal to provide his cellphone PIN and his refusal to consent to a warrantless search of his entire cellphone. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Excessive force, Privileges, Staleness | Comments Off on FL4: Prosr’s argument def refused to give password to phone violated 4A

W.D.Wis.: Guest of an overnight guest had standing, even where owner didn’t know

The guest of an overnight guest on the premises of the owner but without the owner’s knowledge had standing. “Defendants contend that Furdge had no legitimate privacy interest because he was in the home temporarily, lacked Rundle’s knowledge or consent, … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Issue preclusion, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.Wis.: Guest of an overnight guest had standing, even where owner didn’t know

E.D.Cal.: State parole officer could give seized cell phone to HSI for search

Plaintiff on parole did not state a claim that his parole officer gave his multiple cell phone to HSI for search. Petersen v. Buyard, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20986 (E.D.Cal. Feb. 4, 2022). It is not an offense in Minnesota … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: State parole officer could give seized cell phone to HSI for search

D.Conn.: This drug case SW was broad but the attachments narrowed it enough

“The warrant here, although broad, did not lack particularity in terms of data to be searched. The warrant incorporated two attachments relevant to this inquiry. See Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551, 557-58 (2004) (establishing that a court may construe … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Particularity | Comments Off on D.Conn.: This drug case SW was broad but the attachments narrowed it enough

D.Md.: Six-year delay in getting SW for cell phone unreasonable

Officers had defendant’s cell phone for nearly six years from 2015 to 2020, and he was in custody for much of the time. Searching the cell phone six years after seizure was unreasonable. United States v. Briscoe, 2022 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.Md.: Six-year delay in getting SW for cell phone unreasonable

N.D.Ga.: 6 day delay in getting SW for seized cell phones not unreasonable

There was a six day delay between seizure of six cell phones and issuance of a search warrant for them. This was reasonable under CA11 precedent. Moreover, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Norwood, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Ineffective assistance, Reasonableness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: 6 day delay in getting SW for seized cell phones not unreasonable

D.N.M.: Failure to incorporate attachments to SW affidavit subject to GFE

The attachments to the affidavits were attached but not incorporated by words in the affidavit. The court doesn’t decide that this is a Fourth Amendment violation because the good faith exception applies. The search of a cell phone attempted within … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Warrant papers | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Failure to incorporate attachments to SW affidavit subject to GFE

E.D.Cal.: Overbreadth argument has to be developed; court won’t make it for you

The officer picking up defendant’s cell phone and the screen lighting up was not a search. It was inadvertent, and the phone had to be picked up to do anything with it. Even if it was, the exclusionary rule should … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of proof, Cell phones, Probable cause, Search | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Overbreadth argument has to be developed; court won’t make it for you

M.D.Fla.: Cell phone calls with co-conspirator was PC for phone, and GFE applies anyway

Defendant was indicted in Florida for endangered species trafficking, occurring partly in California and Florida. The fact he talked 186 minutes with a co-conspirator over a year was probable cause to search his phone for evidence. Also, the good faith … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Probable cause | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Cell phone calls with co-conspirator was PC for phone, and GFE applies anyway

D.R.I.: Removing back cover of cell phone to see the serial number not unreasonable during inventory

Defendant was in a car that was stopped for overtinting, and that led to a tow and inventory. The police searched for and obtained the serial numbers of four cell phones found during the inventory. They were not otherwise searched, … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Inventory | Comments Off on D.R.I.: Removing back cover of cell phone to see the serial number not unreasonable during inventory

CA9: Supervised release condition of cell phone searches was reasonable

“Koyanagi next challenges the special condition of supervised release requiring him to submit to periodic suspicionless searches of his electronic data. [¶] Koyanagi’s constitutional challenges to this condition are unavailing. See United States v. Bare, 806 F.3d 1011, 1018 n.4 … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA9: Supervised release condition of cell phone searches was reasonable