In less than a generation, cell phones have gone from being rare luxuries for the wealthy to almost universal. Cell phones now keep people connected to the world around us and to one another. These handheld devices contain huge amounts of sensitive and personal data, and password protection is used by most people to safeguard their privacy. However, if you have been arrested and charged with a crime, the contents of your phone may be at issue. Speak to an experienced criminal defense lawyer as soon as possible to understand your cell phone privacy rights. If you are in custody and law enforcement wants to search your phone, do not hand it over, even if you believe you are not guilty of any crime. Contact Khonsari Law Group in St. Petersburg right away instead.
The Fourth Amendment
Under the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, you are protected from unlawful search and seizure, and have the right to be secure in your, “persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The framers of the Constitution could not have imagined the world in 2019; however, their language, written in 1791, continues to protect our most important rights. It means that even though cell phones did not exist when the Fourth Amendment became law, law enforcement today cannot unlawfully seize and search your cell phone. That said, how you handle the request for access to your phone is very important, and may impact any case against you.Probable Cause
In order to search your cellphone, law enforcement must almost always obtain a warrant. To do so, they must persuade a judge that there is probable cause to justify the search and seizure. Probable cause means there is a “certain level of suspicion of criminal activity.” One feature of smartphone technology that is especially appealing to investigators is the ability to track recent locations. Where someone was, and when they were there, can be vital evidence for a criminal case. The recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case Carpenter v. the United States supports the need for a warrant when it comes to searching cell phones. This ruling is especially applicable when it comes to searching location data. Carpenter addressed the applicability of the “third party doctrine” in these types of cases. Under third party doctrine, if someone shares information with a third party, then they have a reduced expectation of privacy of the information. The third party in Carpenter was a cell phone provider. The Court did not apply the third party doctrine to the facts of this case, but instead ruled that a warrant is necessary to obtain a defendant’s location using cell phone towers from the provider.How to Best Protect Your Rights
When someone is placed under arrest, the law requires an officer to read them their Miranda Rights. These rights warn that anything they say may be used against them in a court of law. Therefore, before answering any questions, it is always best to unequivocally ask to speak to an attorney. A lawful search of your phone may ultimately occur. However, denying your consent to search your phone until there is a warrant will delay that search, and give you the opportunity to contact your criminal defense attorney. Furthermore, the exclusionary rule means any evidence obtained from your phone during an illegal search may not be admissible in court. The facts are very important when search and seizure occurs. Be aware that a warrant is not necessary if:- The subject consented to the search; or
- Law enforcement has probable cause to believe that incriminating evidence on your phone is under immediate threat of destruction.