For the most part, judges are notorious slow in embracing new technology. A few years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts noted that the Justices used vacuum tubes to send messages to one another well into the 1970s. Typically, such episodes are simply mildly amusing, at least to some people. In other cases, this reluctance to change is downright dangerous.
Smartphones are a good example. Over 10 years after the first iPhone hit the shelves, there is still no comprehensive criminal law governing them in Illinois or anywhere else. So, courts resolve important questions, like the one addressed below, on a piecemeal basis. That means you need a really good lawyer in these situations.
What Does the Fourth Amendment Say About Searches?
The Fourth Amendment guarantees protection against certain warrantless searches and seizures. The Supreme Court has endorsed the exclusionary rule, which bars states like Illinois, as well as the federal government, from using illegally-obtained evidence in court.
The law has simply not kept up with technology. So, no one is exactly sure how the Fourth Amendment applies, or does not apply, to cell phones.
Search Warrant Specificity in Chicago
One well-settled rule is that search warrants must be specific as to the places and items to be searched and confiscated. If officers have probable cause to believe that there are drugs in the living room, they cannot search a detached garage for drugs just because it is on the same lot of land.
Computer warrants may offer some guidance. For example, the warrant may list the place as “Jane’s laptop” and the items as “files related to possible money laundering.”
These rules are inherently fuzzy. They get even fuzzier if the sought-after information is on Dropbox or some other cloud-based storage as opposed to the computer itself. Nevertheless, Illinois courts routinely uphold warrants like these. To find the files, the government must look all over the laptop, at least on a cursory basis.
The same thing may apply to a smartphone. If the government lists “Tim’s phone” as the place and “child pornography” as the item, investigators may have a right to peruse through the entire phone.
Some Possible Limits in Illinois
Then again, maybe they do not. In 2014, the Supreme Court decided Riley v. California. After arresting a man on weapons charges, officers searched his phone and found several messages that contained street gang phrases. Based mostly on that information, authorities charged the man in a shooting that had occurred several weeks later.
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that officers cannot access digital information without search warrants. The Justices went out of their way to say that the decision was very narrow. Moreover, it involved an unnecessary search conducted without a search warrant. Nevertheless, Riley may limit cell phone search warrants in Chicago. Since this decision was unanimous, when the issue comes up before the Court again, the next decision may be even more defendant-friendly.
Count on Experienced Lawyers
The interplay between cell phones and search warrants is tricky. For a confidential consultation with an experienced criminal defense attorney in Schaumburg, contact Glasgow & Olsson.
(image courtesy of Fabian Grohs)