GA: No standing in phone subscriber records to a phone that’s not in his name

Defendant consented to giving his phone to the police. During his interview, he picked up the phone and was manipulating it, and the officers took it away from him until they could get a search warrant. This was reasonable [and the year before Riley]. “Here, the testimony at trial and the videotape of Davis’ interview with police show that he voluntarily gave officers the cell phone, not once, but twice. And when officers observed Davis manipulating the phone later during the interview, they seized it until they could obtain a search warrant. The United States Supreme Court has approved this reasonable preventative step to preserve evidence. See Riley, supra, 134 SCt at 2487-2488.” Also, defendant did not have standing to challenge seizure of the subscriber records on the phone since the phone wasn’t in his name. [Aside from the records being third-party property which isn’t even discussed. It’s just easier to say “no standing” rather than explain.] Davis v. State, 2017 Ga. LEXIS 527 (June 19, 2017).