{"id":28920,"date":"2017-09-14T17:04:51","date_gmt":"2017-09-14T22:04:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=28920"},"modified":"2017-09-17T13:40:13","modified_gmt":"2017-09-17T18:40:13","slug":"ky-search-incident-of-a-cell-phone-between-riley-cert-grant-and-decision-was-unreasonable-no-binding-authority-in-state-so-no-gfe","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=28920","title":{"rendered":"KY: Search incident of a cell phone between <em>Riley<\/em> cert grant and decision was unreasonable; no binding authority in state, so no GFE"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Defendant\u2019s cell phone was subjected to a search incident for it\u2019s data between the cert grant in Riley and the decision. Riley was a new rule and retroactive. There was no binding authority in Kentucky at the time, so the Davis good faith exception does not apply. <a href=\"http:\/\/162.114.92.72\/COA\/2015-CA-001489.pdf#xml=http:\/\/162.114.92.72\/dtSearch\/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getpdfhits&#038;u=1d1685a8&#038;DocId=29276&#038;Index=D%3a%5cContent%5cop%2ekycourts%2enet%5cIndex&#038;HitCount=89&#038;hits=18+39+62+84+b0+c1+d2+ec+140+193+1a2+1a7+1c2+1d9+1e6+21c+22e+24c+273+297+2e0+2e7+2ee+309+311+338+347+34f+368+37e+390+3be+409+414+427+446+478+4cc+4f4+4ff+554+55d+57b+5c5+5f5+639+672+8f5+9ad+9ff+a0c+a10+b94+c72+c9c+ca8+cb8+cc6+ceb+d03+d11+d4c+d91+da4+edc+f2e+f36+f8e+fc4+fea+1055+10ad+10c6+116c+11a2+11c4+11e4+12e9+1413+141d+149a+1550+162b+167c+1694+16bb+170c+1738+1742+&#038;SearchForm=%2fdtsearch%5fform%2ehtml&#038;.pdf\">Kamphaus v. Commonwealth<\/a>, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 493 (Sept. 8, 2017).<\/p>\n<p>Defendant stopped his car a car length into an intersection, albeit one without a crosswalk. His argument that this was a mistake of law is rejected. He clearly violated the statute. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourt.ohio.gov\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/2\/2017\/2017-Ohio-7515.pdf\">State v. Johnson<\/a>, 2017-Ohio-7515, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 3828 (2d Dist. Sept. 8, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Defendant\u2019s cell phone was subjected to a search incident for it\u2019s data between the cert grant in Riley and the decision. Riley was a new rule and retroactive. There was no binding authority in Kentucky at the time, so the &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=28920\">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":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-28920","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28920","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=28920"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28920\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":28921,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28920\/revisions\/28921"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=28920"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=28920"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=28920"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}