In Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie, 189 L.Ed. 2d 430 (2014), a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held that the warrantless searches of the contents of cellphones seized from a person were not proper as searches incident to arrest and so, absent exigent circumstances particular to the matter, they were a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The opinion raises many issues, but I will focus on one: When technology changes the nature of what has been thought of as private, should the response be to continue to recognize that privacy, or to rethink what is private?
Factual Background
In Riley, the defendant was driving while his license was suspended and was stopped for driving with expired registration tags. He was arrested when two loaded handguns were found in his car. A search incident to arrest revealed “items associated with the ‘Bloods’ street gang,” as well as a smartphone, according to the opinion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
