Quote:
Originally Posted by acp5762
During a Traffic stop an officer only has one objective initially and that is to investigate a traffic violation be it a moving violation such as running a red light or stop sign to a non moving violation such as an exp lic plate or inspection sticker. Upon making contact with you his reasons for searching your vehicle or the contents within it must be faciliatated by Probable Cause. Probable cause is not based on an assumption or a hunch, but rather precise concrete circumstances. To check a cell phone an officer must show in his report what specifics he was looking for. He doesn't have a search warrant with him so in order to make a search during a traffic stop he must show lawfully his reasoning behind it. Their is such a thing called the " Exclusionary Rule" which enables an officer to apply the law for search and seizure from a vehicle without a warrant when time is in the essence. An officer must validate his search through specific criteria which enables him to do so. Having a sneeky suspicion won't cut it even if he gets lucky. You might get taken into custody but nothing will really hold up in court. I would never give an officer leverage to search my vehicle. He can search you, without your consent though.
|
No, you are wrong. As was I when I made my initial guess yesterday.
The law is not yet entirely clear what standard law enforcement needs to show to search the data on a cell phone, but according to the one reported case, they don't need to show probable cause. To my knowledge, and I freely admit that I practice very little criminal law, only one of the Federal Courts of Appeal have ruled on this issue. They found that the data in a cell phone was more like bank account information and had already been shared with others (the cell phone company) and it could be obtained with a subpoena.
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/084227p.pdf
Of course that doesn't fully answer the question on a traffic stop, but it strongly suggests that probably cause isn't required, although some showing may be needed.
If there have been other rulings since September of last year when the Third Circuit case came out, I am unaware of them, but would be interested in reading them.