Crime

Court Rules Warrantless Cellphone Searches OK…But How Far Can You Go?

Appeals Court Rules Some Warrantless Searches of Cellphones AllowedThe U.S. Court of Appeal for the 7th Circuit has ruled that some warrantless searches of cellphones, for example to obtain phone numbers, is allowable and does not violate a person’s Fourth Amendment rights.

Reuters reports that Abel Flores-Lopez was given 10 years in prison for involvement in a drug case after police identified him from a cellphone they found on the scene of a drug bust. They had to enter the cellphone to obtain the number. Flores-Lopez argued the police did not have the right to search the contents of the phone without a warrant.

(Related: Texas city to buy $180K cellphone tracker to help ‘combat criminal activity’)

He appealed his sentencing but it was rejected by the court. Reuters reports that the court said the invasion of privacy was “so slight” that it was not considered an unreasonable search.

Issues with search warrants and electronic devices have been growing as the technology becomes increasingly attractive to authorities. Earlier this year, it went as high as the Supreme Court to decide that GPS tracking of a vehicle does in fact require a warrant. This is also not the first case regarding cellphones. We reported last year how Michigan State Police could download your cellphone’s information while at a traffic stop. Right now, laws differ by state. We reported that in California, for example cellphone searches without a warrant are allowed, and in Florida cellphones are considered “containers” and are therefore not subject to needing a warrant. Ohio, on the other hand, has banned warrantless cellphone searches.

But, the ruling gave some judges the opportunity to discuss the doors that could be opened with this ruling regarding searches of cellphones. Reuters has more:

“Lurking behind this issue is the question whether and when a laptop or desktop computer, tablet, or other type of computer (whether called a ‘computer’ or not) can be searched without a warrant,” Judge Richard Posner wrote for the three-judge panel.

He raised the example of the iCam, which allows someone to use a phone to connect to a home-computer web camera, enabling someone to search a house interior remotely.

“At the touch of a button, a cell phone search becomes a house search,” he wrote.

Posner compared the cell phone to a diary. Just as police are entitled to open a pocket diary to copy an owner’s address, they should be able to turn on a cell phone to learn its number, he wrote. But just as they’re forbidden from examining love letters tucked between the pages of an address book, so are they forbidden from exploring letters in the files of a phone.

Reuters reports that while the judges have not made a ruling on just how deep searches on cellphones can go, at least for now finding numbers seems to be non-intrusive enough to bypass a warrant.

Comments (53)

1 2
  • Not going to take it anymore
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 4:36pm

    The court addmitted that the invasion of privacy was “so slight ”. So slight, alittle,sort of, . All mean yes. Yes the court broke that thing called law. Inwich is is the court is obligated to follow.

    Report Post »  
  • BarackStalin
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 3:10pm

    It’s sad that we have to fear our own government.

    Report Post » BarackStalin  
  • BarackStalin
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 3:09pm

    This is just another example of why you can’t even engage in dialogue with the police.

    Whether they ask if you have a cell phone or they ask you what time it is, the only feasible answer is,

    “I would like to discuss that with my attorney”

    You can’t give them an inch because they will take a mile.

    Report Post » BarackStalin  
  • Endstatism
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:44pm

    Regardless of the court ruling, I will never allow my cellphone to be searched without a warrant. The Fourth Amendment means what it says no matter what judges say. If the police demand to see my cellphone and if I refuse, does that mean I will expect a beatdown?

    Report Post » Endstatism  
  • objectivetruth
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:04pm

    Folks I have a problem with the 4th being stepped on as though it were toilet paper.Its one thing if its truly probale cause.Its another to use it for a fishing expedition.The argument well if you haven‘t done anything in this case doesn’t ring.Why?Ever allow someone you didn’t know to use your cell?Stuck somewhere and desperate asks you to make a call for them or if in public you allow them to make the call?Admittedly the police in that case should know that it wasn’t a call you made.Most people only repeadly call those business’s or people they know rather well [especailly true on prepaid services.]You however could be looked at rather harshly simply for helping someone by the one time use of your phone.Most decent cops won‘t do that but you’ve got pr- – - s that would.Think it might be time to stop being a good samaritan at all.Might just be time to stop carrying a cell altogether.

    Report Post »  
  • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 11:24am

    Ah, the ebb and flow of Constitutional liberties. District Courts Taketh. SCOTUS giveth back.

    Not really worried about this, as I‘ll own or carry a cellphone the day after I’m dead, but this has brought up an interesting idea.

    Cops want to take any cellphone they find in a car they pulled over and plug it into their system to download its contents for perusal at their leisure… Ditto TSA agents at the airport… Okay.

    You want to take my “cellphone” and plug it into your hardware to do things the Constitution does not permit? We can do that. Of course, my cellphone will not be a real cellphone. It’ll just be a little bit of electronic wizardry that makes it look, sound, feel, and taste like a cell phone, but when you plug it into your hardware, it’ll just short all your pins to Vdd. Have fun sucking any more cellphone data after that.

    Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • cantstandlibs
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:55pm

      Fun to think such things, but then you will get a further indictment of criminal mischief, disabling a security device/government property, and you name it. Lucky for you, you would be jailed with your own gender and can have the type of love life you prefer, more or less. :-))

      Report Post »  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 8:24pm

      Prison is still prison and rape is still rape. BUT! It would not have been I who plugged the electronic device into the government system. It would not have been I who applied voltage to the electronic device.

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
    • Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 8:41pm

      This is what really gave me the idea in the first place.

      http://www.actsofgord.com/Wrath/chapter03.php

      Report Post » Lesbian Packing Hollow Points  
  • Freedomluver
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 8:33am

    Eeerrrrrr, “papers and effects”? What Bill of Rights…..

    Report Post » Freedomluver  
    • JRook
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 9:32am

      The title of this report is a misrepresentation. Looking at the contents of a cell phone is not exactly the same as tapping the phone. A cell phone found at the scene and recovered as evidence is not different than paper files that of course can be opened and the papers read.

      Report Post »  
    • Freedomluver
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 11:05am

      Not sure why my comments won’t appear…so let’s try this again.

      Why can they “of course can be opened and the papers read” without using curcular reasoning that assumes the courts have not trampled on the 4th amendment?

      Can you think of any logical reason not to simply follow the Constitution by obtaining a proper warrant rather allowing for obvious fishing expeditions?

      Report Post » Freedomluver  
  • love the kids
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 7:17am

    Remember some of the arguements that were brought up people: You get pulled over for speeding and your teenage daughter is sitting next to you in the front seat, does the cop have the right to ask for both cell phones? What if she was using yours to text dad to ask him to bring home a pizza, can the driver be charged with texting while driving? If the cell phone was in your pocket and the cop didn’t “see” it, do you have the right to refuse to hand it over just like if he asked you if he can search your trunk without really having a reason to? If you just deleted a text could you be charged with destroying evidence?
    Many questions people.

    Report Post »  
    • Atilla
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 7:26am

      Worse than that is the new thing with having government monitors in government schools to insure that there is no “bullying.” If you belive that then you belive the world is flat. Schools are the battleground folks. They the Communists” want your kids. Just like tha National Socialist Workers Party (Nazis)

      Report Post »  
    • pamela kay
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:30pm

      LOVE THE KIDS: You brought up some good points. Thanks.

      Report Post » pamela kay  
  • Atilla
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 7:14am

    The expectation of privacy is sometimes suspended when probable cause exist to investigate a misdemeanor or felony. Operative word is “probable cause” that has been extended to mean information retrievable at an active crime scene. Search of a vehicle after a traffic stop comes to mind.

    Report Post »  
  • ShadowPlacebo
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 6:24am

    So….this guy said the police didn’t have a warrant to give him 10 years in prison. So wait a few days, get the warrant and he still gets prison time.

    Report Post » ShadowPlacebo  
  • TRILO
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 2:41am

    Not sure how I feel on this one as the phone was found at an active crime scene. No different than if they listened to an answering machine or looked at caller id at a crime scene. I do not agree at all with the police searching a cell phone at a traffic stop. To me that is just the police going on a fishing expedition and should be protected from search and seizure. Next they will allow searching one’s cell phone or computer when stopped for jaywalking.

    Report Post » TRILO  
  • Apple Bite
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:54am

    This is why I don’t even bother to take my phone with me in public anymore. You can get pulled over and they can ask for your cell phn and take whatever the hell they feel like. So where’s the privacy anymore?

    We need a civil war in this country, to get their attention, that‘s all I’m going to say…

    Report Post » Apple Bite  
    • hidden_lion
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 9:27am

      You do not have to hand over your phone, just keep in the pocket and not where it can be readily viewed. You are under no obligation to tell the officer you have a phone at all.

      Report Post » hidden_lion  
  • ProbIemSoIver
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:56am

    U.S. Court of Appeal for the 7th Circuit is a private company.

    Wouldn’t this explain it all?

    “United States Court Of Appeals in Washington, DC (Or any of it’s States Branches) is a private company categorized under Courts. Our records show it was established in 1891 and incorporated in District of Columbia.”
    http://www.manta.com/c/mmftqyb/united-states-court-of-appeals

    Our Real Representative Republic became a Corporation in 1871.
    Under The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 a private corporation named, “The District of Columbia”, was formed. It trademarked the names “THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT”, “United States”, “U.S.”, “U.S.A.”, “USA”, and “America”. It should be noted that this corporation was not simply a reformation of the municipality as it’s Organic Act was chartered in 1808. Without amending that municipality’s charter, this 1871 Act marked the creation of a new private corporation known as, “The District of Columbia” (hereinafter “Corp. U.S.”) owned and operated by the actual government for the purpose of carrying out the business needs of the government under martial law.
    http://www.teamlaw.net/history.htm

    Please people. WAKE UP !!!!!!!

    Report Post » ProbIemSoIver  
    • lukerw
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:13am

      So… we are all… actually… living in the District of Columbia!

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:27am

      The Feds now can LOL while they search our records. And when we get mad they will just JK and say they weren’t really looking at our files. Meanwhile, Holder will go wild and find out how we voted, where we live, and label us all cowards, worthy of being investigated. Because we are all tainted by white guilt and the stench of the jewish media. We will be found all zionist, Farakaun will be the grand poobah, and we will all be found Infidels. Shariah will be the law, and we WILL submit to Muhammads law, or face the sword. Mulan Labe will be heard throughout the USA.

      Or something like that. I may be wrong, who wants PIE?

      Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
    • ProbIemSoIver
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 2:41am

      But then the Global Elite’s Federal Reserve seized the Corporation “United States” in 1933 under a international lien, after we declared bankruptcy and defauilted on our 1913 loan:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlCs7u1ihws

      They transfered the deed to the IMF and World Bank in 1944 in Bretton Woods.
      The IMF created the UN the next year.

      In 1992, the year AGENDA 21 was introduced, AMERICA was FOR SALE under Bush’s
      Executive Order #12803 – the INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATIZATION act.

      Everything you think is a Representative Republic is actually a LLC corporation.

      Check this:
      “Executive Office Of The President in Washington, DC is a PRIVATE COMANY categorized under Executive Offices. Our records show it was established in 1939 and incorporated in District of Columbia.”
      http://www.manta.com/c/mm768fr/executive-office-of-the-president

      Hmm… est. 1939, 6 years after the Federal Reserve’s take-over of our “Government” due to the Bankruptcy….err, Bank Holiday.

      Report Post » ProbIemSoIver  
    • Mateytwo Barreett
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 7:22am

      The 5th- isn’t that where the smart latina came from??

      Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
  • lovenfl3
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:36am

    And everyday we continue to lose our freedoms. What happened to the whole “we the people” concept that this country was founded on? As the courts become more politically active, there is no sanctuary from the power grabbing politicians. Just wait until Obamacare goes into effect. That will give them access to every single aspect of our life. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o35_9qcK0U0

    Report Post » lovenfl3  
  • OlefromMN
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:28am

    Does anybody else think about the shows on evening TV that are watched? They all are incorporating “ditch phones” in their storyline. Buy a disposable phone and have the ability to ditch it in a garbage can on a second’s notice. Keep your contacts in a separate mode and nobody is the wiser. If Hollywood has figured this out, why hasn’t the federal gubmint? Oh, never mind.

    Report Post » OlefromMN  
    • 1casawizard
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:00am

      @OLE. What they are talking about here is, obtaining phone numbers from a confiscated phone from an arrested person. Usually involving a drug arrest with mid to upper level suspects. Yes, using a throw-away phone works.

      Report Post » 1casawizard  
    • Micmac
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:39am

      Wrong – they can search on a traffic stop.

      NoBama 2012

      Report Post »  
    • MemphisViking
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 3:37pm

      They can’t search on a traffic stop. Speeding does not constitute probable cause that any other crime has been committed. I’ve been stopped before and asked if they could search my vehicle. They know when they need permission and they don‘t ask for it if they don’t need it.

      Report Post »  
  • Captain Crunch
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:21am

    No limits. I’m sure there will be no visitors in the camps.

    Report Post »  
  • DIVINEPROVIDENCE1776
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:20am

    What part of the Fourth Amendment do they not understand?

    Report Post » DIVINEPROVIDENCE1776  
    • Mateytwo Barreett
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 7:25am

      @Brian
      You say you’re from FL but is seems you have met some fine Georgian attorneys!!

      Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:20am

    They should have set the absolute boundaries of what could be and could not be done. Period.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:33am

      They did. It’s called the 4th Amendment. SCOTUS is wrong here. There is no such thing as “compelling state interest” and to hell with “reasonable”. My rights are not to be infringed. If they want my stuff, they’re going to be SOL.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
  • Smokey_Bojangles
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:08am

    I had to go from being worried about Communist Democrats not letting me eat bacon and Communist Obama shredding the Constitution.Now I have to worry about Fascist Republicans stealing my pee and sending the cops in to my house to shoot my dog and steal my cell phone.The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
  • MrMagoo
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:07am

    Cellphones need to have a self destruct function,whereby all info on the phone is destroyed by entering a simple and quickly accessed code.Accomplishing this remotely also,using a different phone,would be nice.
    If Mr.Phelps could do it to a tape recorder back in 1966(Mission Impossible)..”Good morning Mr.Phelps,Your mission, Jim, should you choose to accept it…….This tape will self-destruct in five seconds.”

    Report Post » MrMagoo  
  • lukerw
    Posted on March 2, 2012 at 12:04am

    Let me understand this: You give up the Right of Protection of Personal Property… if that Property can come into Contact with the Public… such as Phones & Computers! Then, what about… my Clothes, Car, Lawn, Door.. ???

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • hidden_lion
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 9:33am

      It is the same reasoning that some states choose to ignore the “bear arms” part of the 2nd amendment by declaring the right is only good in the home.

      Report Post » hidden_lion  
  • Razorhunters
    Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:53pm

    seems to me , that with this we can visit the homes of any official and look thru their records…?
    or any govt office etc…

    Report Post » Razorhunters  
  • GhostOfJefferson
    Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:48pm

    Also – PW protect your phone kids. If they show up and demand your phone, flip the lid causing it to “lock”. Become deaf/mute after that. Make the bas tards work for it.

    Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • BlueStrat
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:49pm

      The Michigan Highway Patrol uses these gadgets called “slurpers” that “slurp” the data by bypassing the phone’s software completely and accessing the unencrypted data directly. No encryption or software can protect the phone because of the way it stores data. There is NO “app for that”. It even retrieves deleted data.

      The only protection is to not carry a cellphone, or, to at least make it necessary for them to send it to a lab to extract the data by opening the phone and physically disconnecting the data-carrying pin of the mini/micro-USB connector. They can’t “slurp” data at a traffic stop that they cannot connect to.

      If they attempt to “slurp” your phone’s data at a traffic stop or similar, they’ll fail, and when they start asking you about it, just feign ignorance and start loudly asking “You BROKE my phone!?!? Who’s gonna pay for my phone!?!?”. If you play it off right, chances are good they’ll bail on the traffic stop to avoid an incident report on the “broken” phone, and the possibility of a lawsuit against the department.

      Of course, if you want to live dangerously, you could conceivably replace the phone’s guts with an electronic camera flash-charging circuit and fry their “slurper” with a few thousand volts! This will, however, likely result in arrest and prosecution. But, they’ll be out a very expensive little rights-violating toy! :)

      Report Post »  
  • Marci
    Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:46pm

    “Reuters reports that the court said the invasion of privacy was “so slight” that it was not considered an unreasonable search.”

    So basically they have said that the Fourth Amendment no longer applies because as the need arises, they will deem it a “slight” invasion here and there. As the “norm” changes, what was invasive last week may not be extreme next week. Make these types of searches the norm and the next level of invasion will be deemed “slight” by the courts.

    Report Post » Marci  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:49pm

      You broke the code! :)

      Why we trusted a government appointed court to keep government in check is beyond me.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
  • Razorhunters
    Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:46pm

    fluck the courts…treasonous sobs.

    we have lots of rope.

    time to pardon and pacify.

    Report Post » Razorhunters  
    • 1casawizard
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:15am

      Keep your pithforks sharp….

      Report Post » 1casawizard  
    • objectivetruth
      Posted on March 2, 2012 at 1:12pm

      I always keep my pitchfork sharp.Its easier to turn my compst pile.See i even have a place to bury them when I’m done,Oh don’t cry.It will be the first time they have been of any use at any point in their pathitic little lives.O.bammapost ,so full of it ,you can spread it in the desert and anything will grow.Don’t need water ,the tears of the stupid[his slavish voters] will water it.This applies for all of them, his name just has a good ring and combination to it.

      Report Post »  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love