RI: No reasonable expectation of privacy in text messages sent to and on another’s telephone

Defendant has no standing to challenge the [consent] search of a cell phone of another person even though that cell phone was in his place where he would otherwise have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This case started with a 911 call over a battered child, and defendant made damaging and incriminating text messages to the mother of the child. It doesn’t matter that there’s an identical copy of the text messages on defendant’s phone, too, because he willingly sent them out, thereby losing control of them. State v. Patino, 2014 R.I. LEXIS 99 (June 20, 2014):

We hold, therefore, that defendant’s reasonable expectation of privacy in the text messages contained in Oliver’s phone, whether sent from or received by that phone, does not extend to the messages contained on another’s phone, despite the fact that there exists an identical copy of the messages on the challenger’s phone. As iterated above, this is chiefly due to control; a cell phone user retains control over what becomes of the content on his or her phone, but entirely loses control of the messages contained on the phone of another. When applied to the case at hand, therefore, we conclude that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy, and thus no standing to challenge the search and seizure of Oliver’s LG phone, its contents, and all derivatives therefrom.