Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

4. Cell phones

State v. George Steven Burch, 2019AP404-CR, certification granted 11/18/20; case activity (including briefs) Issues presented (from the certification): Did police violate Burch’s Fourth Amendment rights by: exceeding the scope of Burch’s consent to search his cell phone by downloading the phone’s entire contents, rather than only the text messages; unlawfully retaining the entire cell phone… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. George Steven Burch, 2019AP404-CR, District 3 (10/20/20), review granted 11/18/20; case activity (including briefs) Burch … contends the [Green Bay Police Department] and the [Brown County Sheriff’s Office] violated his Fourth Amendment rights in three ways: (1) the GBPD exceeded the scope of his consent to search his cell phone by downloading the… Read more

{ 0 comments }

The 4th Amendment in the digital age

Last June in Carpenter v. United States, SCOTUS held that phone users have a 4th Amendment right to historical cell site location records. Prof. Orin Kerr has a new paper out about how to implement Carpenter. Click here.  But why stop reading there? You can also read Prof.  Alan Rozenshtein’s new paper on 4th Amendment… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Kerr’s latest post considers 2 recent federal district court decisions on this subject. One raises the question of whether, under the 5th Amendment, the government may compel a suspect to enter a passcode to unlock his device.  The other considers whether the government may use a passcode obtained from a suspect in violation of Miranda… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Question presented: Whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cell phone records revealing the location and movements of a cell phone user over the course of 127 days is permitted by the Fourth Amendment. Lower court opinion: United States v. Carpenter, 819 F.3d 880 (6th Cir. 2016); USSC Docket; Scotusblog page This is a… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Ryan H. Tentoni, 2015 WI App 77; case activity (including briefs) Tentoni does not have an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the text messages delivered to another person’s phone and therefore can’t seek to suppress the text messages and other subsequently obtained phone records as fruit of the government’s illegal search of the phone… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Bobby L. Tate, 2014 WI 89, 7/24/14, affirming an unpublished court of appeals decision; majority opinion by Justice Roggensack; case activity State v. Nicolas Subdiaz-Osorio, 2014 WI 87, 7/24/14, affirming an unpublished per curiam court of appeals decision; lead opinion by Justice Prosser; case activity In two decisions consisting of 8 separate opinions spread out across… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Riley v. California, USSC No. 13-132 (together with United States v. Wurie, USSC No. 13-212), 2014 WL 2864483 (June 25, 2014), reversing People v. Riley, No. D059840 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2013) (unpublished) (and affirming United States v. Wurie, 728 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2013)); Scotusblog case page (which includes links to briefs and commentary) and symposium page (additional opinion commentary) In a… Read more

{ 0 comments }