N.D.Cal.: 2012 download of cell phone two hours after arrest not search incident; Davis inapplicable

Two defendants, two cell phones searched in March 2012. One on parole, one not. The parole search of the cell phone is valid. The other, however, wasn’t a search incident of the cell phone; it was downloaded two hours after his arrest when there was time to get a search warrant. The government’s Davis argument is unavailing here because this same court held that a delayed download of a cell phone was unlawful in 2012. Essentially, Riley gets retroactive effect on these facts. United States v. Martinez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112347 (N.D. Cal. August 12, 2014).

Officers attempted to stop defendant for overtinted windows, and he was deliberately slow to stop. When he did, the odor of marijuana was apparent, and this led to the search of the car being valid under the automobile exception. United States v. James, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15638, 2014 FED App. 0613N (6th Cir. August 8, 2014).*

Defendant’s motion to dismiss for a Fourth Amendment violation is denied. The recourse is a motion to suppress. United States v. Rodriguez-Melendez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112997 (M.D. Pa. August 14, 2014).

Defendant’s 2255 for failure to move to suppress a search that he admits he consented to is denied. United States v. Alvarez-Lopez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112335 (D. Idaho August 13, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Cell phones, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.