OH5: Ten day delay in getting warrant for cell phone seized on exigency was reasonable

The seizure of defendant’s cell phone at a police interview was reasonable. The detective had probable cause to believe that it contained evidence of an armed robbery. Its warrantless seizure was demanded by the exigencies of the situation because defendant knew from the interview that police suspected his phone had been used to relay information concerning a crime and the detective therefore had reason to believe that defendant would destroy the phone, discard it, or delete the information on it. The 10-day delay in obtaining a warrant was not unreasonable, as the time period included a weekend and a federal holiday, defendant’s expectation of privacy in the phone was diminished by the fact that he shared it with another person, and the seizure did not restrain his liberty interests. State v. Hidey, 2016-Ohio-7233, 2016 Ohio App. LEXIS 4088 (5th Dist. Oct. 3, 2016).