PA: Cell phone left recording in a college coed bathroom was treated as abandoned property despite intention to return later

Defendant hid a recording smartphone in a coed bathroom at Villanova University that a female student found and turned over to the University Police. The phone was essentially abandoned even though he intended to return to recover it later, and Riley does not protect against that. Commonwealth v. Kane, 2019 PA Super 153, 2019 Pa. Super. LEXIS 453 (May 9, 2019):

In light of the trial court’s findings of fact, which the record supports, we discern no error of law in the trial court’s conclusion that when Appellant intentionally and voluntarily left his cell phone in a public bathroom he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his cell phone. Once Appellant voluntarily abandoned his cell phone in a public bathroom, he abandoned any legitimate expectation of privacy in its contents. Likewise, he abandoned standing to complain of a search or seizure of that cell phone. See Shoatz, 366 A.2d at 1219-20. Accordingly, under the facts and circumstances of this case, the trial court did not err when it concluded that Appellant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy and denied Appellant’s Motion to Suppress the warrantless search of his cell phone. Cf. Commonwealth v. Sodomsky, 2007 PA Super 369, 939 A.2d 363, 369 (Pa. Super. 2007) (reversing the suppression of child pornography found on a personal computer when the defendant left his computer at a store for repairs, concluding that he “knowingly exposed the contents of his computer to the public and [] lost any reasonable expectation of privacy in those contents”).

This entry was posted in Abandonment, Cell phones. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.