Comments on: Police Blotter: Cops need warrant to search cell phone?

Alleged medical-marijuana distributors arrested in San Francisco say police should have obtained warrant for search of cell phone.

[fred dunn]

Darned Right! Invasion of privacy...

Without a warrant. Don't get me wrong but just because someone gets picked up doesn't mean they have to expose all of their data, contacts, call logs, calendar, etc.
With the proliferation of Smartphones you could have the equivalent of a file cabinet's worth of information on your phone. I have nothing to hide but if law enforcement wants access to all of my files they had better come with a warrant specifically itemizing said file cabinet.
Again I have nothing to hide but I trust them to safeguard that information about as much as if I just put it in the public domain.

[sal-magnone]

Question

If he had a notebook would they need a warrant? How about a wallet?

[SeizeCTRL]

What about..

Probable Cause? They just raided a house filled with illegal drugs and paraphernalia. If in the course of the raid they discover that these people are in fact selling / distributing 'pot' then checking their phones would be a very logical step. Don't get me wrong, I am all for protecting privacy, but in a case like this, I would see their phones as evidence of a crime picked up in the raid.

If you are dealing, it might be best you delete those text messages with "where da weed at?" Then again, you should get a real job like the rest of us and stop selling illegal drugs.

[Black_Cowboy_Hat]

If you did nothing wrong you have nothing to hide. So what's the big deal?

I agree with you whole heartedly on this one. I have had cops tell me exactly what I have as the subject line. The big deal is that it is none of your damned business! Just because I have done nothing wrong and thus have nothing to hide doesn't mean that I am going to allow a total stranger to look through my personal belongings. I often wonder how the police officer would feel if the same question was posed to him/her or their spouse or children. Would they want some person they have never met before ( and therefore have no real reason to trust ) crawling through their file cabinet, bedroom closet or underware drawer? These persons may have more motive to search your stuff other than protecting the public, and could expose your personal effects, papers, belongings to others. In today's world of you need to protect your stuff from everyone especially your digital stuff.

[Marcus Westrup]

Border crossing

Border guards don't need a warrant to search a phone. Or laptop. Or even need to justify their actions. And yet they carry out many of the same functions as police.
Does this seem like a problem to anyone else?

[TucsonAlexAZ]

completely different issue

At the border you are asking permission to enter and they can ask anything of you or turn you away. You aren't under arrest, you aren't required to accede to their requests/demands unless you want to cross.

[Black_Cowboy_Hat]

Amendments get stepped on more every day.

The 1st amendment guarantees us the right to free speech. Where in today's society is that even applicable? Just a few weeks ago Imus lost everything he ever worked for because he said some nasty things. The man had his career flushed down the toilet because freedom of speech doesn't exsist.
2nd amendment - well let's not even go there.
3rd amendment - I think the abuse of eminent domain falls under this one
4th amendment - cops do it all the time. They find something and THEN get a warrant to cover their hind ends.
5th amendment - the right not to incriminate yourself. I think that has been trampled on a few times in the last few years. The whole CIA agent identity leak comes to mind
6th -Speedy trial - can't think of anything at the moment ( maybe Leonard Peltier)
7th - Has anyone seen People's court? Hello!
8th - Excessive bail or fines / cruel or unusual punishment. I don't know about you but I have seen bail amounts skyrocket over the last 20 years and unusual punishment... anyone read the story about the guy banned from anything that could possibly be connected to the internet, including anything that he might have to use to earn a living? Ok, he's a pediphile but that sounds like VERY unusual punishment. Also to restrict a person's ability to be employed sounds a little cruel to me.
9th - Bill of rights not all encompassing - if it's not mentioned it is retained by the people. Yeah RIGHT! Big government has been telling us what we can and can not do since at least the mid 1800's
10th - "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people." So where does the federal governement get off telling the local school board what can and can not be allowed in the classroom and what MUST be taught? To have the Federal government telling teachers what they have to teach sounds a little tyranical to me.
The reason why the police, the legal system and the federal government gets away with it is simply because people do not know what their rights are. Secondly, the people, not being educated in their rights, demand that the government step in and tie the hands of the legistlature. Mandatory sentencing is the best example of this one. I think sentencing should be left to the judge that hears the case and knows all the details, not someone that does not know the details, circumstances or idividual being tried. (Example - In Florida if you are caught carrying a firearm without a concealed weapons permit you will be sentenced to a minimum of 3 years in prison. Sounds like a good law right? Try in this scenario. Hurricane Wilma hit West Palm Beach, power was out in some areas for over a month. The owner of small grocery store is walking from his home, the two blocks to his store with his handgun to protect his store from possible looters. This hypothetical person who has no criminal history, is a community volunteer, reads to the blind on the weekends, donated his kidney to a stranger, recieved the congressional medal of honor while in the service will be going to jail for 3 years for simply trying to protect his store from criminals. Still sound like a good idea to you? )
My advice, learn your rights, advise others of their rights once you know yours and most importantly don't let politicians take away your rights.

[disco-legend-zeke]

Ther eason we have the right to vote.

The framers of out constitution knew that the government would attempt to steal all our rights back away from us.

The right to be secure in our person and papers, and not to incriminate ourselves would both appear to limit search of closed data containers such as a cell phone, or even an old fashioned address book.

A search WITH a warrent, would likewise include computers and cellphones IF the warrent included "all papers and contacts"

Unfortunately, the RICO laws ahve turned the cops into thieves, in one experience, virginia cops stopped my son-in-law because they wanted to steal his pickup truck.

They used the pretense of "tinting too dark" which is a typical bogus excuse to stop profiled kids, then made them wait several hours while they performed a warrentless search.

WARNING: NEVER, EVER, say "yes" or "no" when the police ask a question.

the question will be "Do you have any drugs or illegal items in you car do you mind if i take a look?" no matter if you say yes or no, the crooked cop can seartch your car.

according to RICO, if he finds as much as one seed, he gets to keep your car.

if you are lucky, it will just be your car... they have the same power to steal your house.

[runeford]

That is an interesting read. Whats next? Encrypted Cell Phones becoming the norm? Laptops have definitely moved in that direction. I have written about this here -- http://www.flawedspecies.com/thoughts/how-police-will-download-all-your-cell-phone-information/