E.D.Ky.: Cell phone likely had evidence on it and police saw it in plain view and could seize it to get SW

Defendant and his wife had an argument about him communicating with underage girls, and he left the house and she called the police. The phone was in plain view in the house, it had apparent evidence on it, and it was reasonable for the police to seize it to get a search warrant for it. “True suggests that deputies had a constitutional obligation, in that moment, to either leave the phone with his wife, seek him out to ask permission to seize the phone, or seek a warrant because the phone was his and not hers. The law does not require any of these alternatives on the facts presented to the Court.” United States v. True, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2736 (E.D.Ky. Jan. 11, 2016).

The USMJ [somehow] finds reasonable suspicion from defendant sitting in his car in a motel parking lot on his phone in front of a room occupied by a prostitute. United States v. Underdue, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174396 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 23, 2015), adopted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3503 (E.D.N.C. Jan. 7, 2016).*