IL: State did not satisfy foregone conclusion test to get cell phone password

The state did not satisfy the foregone conclusion test to get access to defendant’s password on his cell phone. People v. Spicer, 2019 Ill. App. LEXIS 129, 2019 Ill. App. LEXIS 129 (Mar. 7, 2019):

[*P23] Even if we were to conclude that the foregone conclusion exception properly focuses on the passcode, the State did not and could not satisfy the requirements for the foregone conclusion exception. While the State is aware that the passcode existed and that Spicer knew it, the State could not know that the passcode was authentic until after it was used to decrypt Spicer’s phone. Moreover, the production of Spicer’s passcode would provide the State more information than what it already knew. Although the focus of the foregone conclusion is on the passcode, in our view, it properly should be placed on the information the State is ultimately seeking, which is not the passcode but everything on Spicer’s phone. We find that requiring Spicer to provide his passcode implicates his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination and the trial court did not err in denying the State’s motion to compel.