AZ: Even def lying about his identity on arrest didn’t justify search incident of cell phone

When defendant was arrested, his cell phone was seized and searched, and it could not be justified as a search incident even though defendant initially lied about his name. State v. Ontiveros-Loya, 2015 Ariz. App. LEXIS 111 (June 30, 2015).

The CI was corroborated by his own words on a wiretap and by observations of the police in his interactions with the defendant. United States v. Clemmons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86419 (E.D.Ark. July 1, 2015).*

The trial court had a basis to credit the officer’s testimony defendant said “Yes, go right ahead,” rather than defendant’s testimony that he said, “Well, you’re going to anyway.” Warren v. State, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 6718 (Tex.App.–San Antonio July 1, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Consent, Informant hearsay. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.