{"id":64936,"date":"2026-10-02T11:22:49","date_gmt":"2026-10-02T16:22:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64936"},"modified":"2026-10-02T11:22:49","modified_gmt":"2026-10-02T16:22:49","slug":"ca2-cell-phone-search-reasonable-at-the-border","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64936","title":{"rendered":"CA2: Cell phone search reasonable at the border"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>At the border, defendant\u2019s cell phone was first manually searched and then forensically searched. Neither was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. <a href=\"https:\/\/ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov\/decisions\/SUM\/25-1428_so.pdf\">United States v. Robinson<\/a>, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 30035 (2d Cir. Oct. 1, 2026), following <a href=\"https:\/\/ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov\/decisions\/OPN\/24-960_complete_opn.pdf\">United States v. Alisigwe<\/a>, \u2014 F.4th \u2014, 2026 WL 2751713 (2d Cir. Sept. 17, 2026) (posted <a href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64821\">here<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>There was no reasonable suspicion on the totality. The court considers all six factors the government posits, but finds them wanting on the totality. Nothing here separated defendant from other innocent travelers. United States v. Kyle, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 225052 (N.D. Okla. Oct. 1, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A probation search and defendant\u2019s reveal of the password to his cell phone was reasonable. The PO suspected CSAM and confirmed so a search warrant was obtained. It was all reasonable. Kerr v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 327 (Sep. 30, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A retaliatory misdemeanor arrest without probable cause violates clearly established law. Fambrough v. City of E. Cleveland, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 30136 (6th Cir. Oct. 1, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>At the border, defendant\u2019s cell phone was first manually searched and then forensically searched. Neither was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Robinson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 30035 (2d Cir. Oct. 1, 2026), following United States v. Alisigwe, &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64936\">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":[10,5,149,58,40,35],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-64936","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-border-search","category-cell-phones","category-first-amendment","category-probationparole-search","category-qualified-immunity","category-reasonable-suspicion"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64936","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=64936"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64936\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":64937,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64936\/revisions\/64937"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=64936"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=64936"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=64936"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}