{"id":18204,"date":"2015-07-28T08:05:05","date_gmt":"2015-07-28T13:05:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=18204"},"modified":"2015-08-02T04:59:48","modified_gmt":"2015-08-02T09:59:48","slug":"md-davis-good-faith-saves-a-search-incident-of-a-cell-phone-3-years-before-riley-was-decided-even-though-no-state-case-ever-said-so","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=18204","title":{"rendered":"MD: Davis good faith saves a search incident of a cell phone 3 years before Riley was decided, even though no state case ever said so"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Search incident of defendant\u2019s cell phone two and three years before Riley was decided was in Davis good faith based on Robinson [even though no state or Fourth Circuit case had said so]. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.mdcourts.gov\/opinions\/coa\/2015\/11a14.pdf\">Demby v. State<\/a>, 2015 Md. LEXIS 490 (July 27, 2015); <a href=\"http:\/\/www.mdcourts.gov\/opinions\/coa\/2015\/7a14.pdf\">Spence v. State<\/a>, 2015 Md. LEXIS 491 (July 27, 2015). [How can anybody say with a straight face that Robinson&#8217;s crumpled cigarette pack equates with a smartphone for search incident purposes? This court just did.]<\/p>\n<p>Nexus was established between defendant, drug activity, and a hotel room where he was desperate to get something out of the room safe. United States v. Sutherland,  2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97223 (D.Me. February 12, 2015),* adopted 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97223 (D.Me. July 22, 2015).*<\/p>\n<p>Minnesota&#8217;s test-refusal statute does not violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine by imposing a criminal penalty on a person who has been arrested for DWI and has refused to submit to a breath test. <a href=\"http:\/\/mn.gov\/lawlib\/archive\/ctappub\/2015\/opa141813-072715.pdf\">State v. Bennett<\/a>, 2015 Minn. App. LEXIS 55 (July 27, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Search incident of defendant\u2019s cell phone two and three years before Riley was decided was in Davis good faith based on Robinson [even though no state or Fourth Circuit case had said so]. Demby v. State, 2015 Md. LEXIS 490 &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=18204\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,55,11,38],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18204","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cell-phones","category-drug-testing","category-good-faith-exception","category-nexus"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18204","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=18204"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18204\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18262,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18204\/revisions\/18262"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=18204"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=18204"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=18204"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}