An Unreasonable Expectation? Warrantless Searches of Cell Phones

Cell phones today have nearly the capabilities of a personal computer. A survey last year revealed that 88% of adults in the US own a cell phone, and 55% of all adult cell phone owners use their phones for Internet or email. In particular, the courts have not reached a consensus regarding the legali...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBrigham Young University law review Vol. 2013; no. 5; p. 1363
Main Author Hinckley, Michael V
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Provo Brigham Young University, Reuben Clark Law School 01.09.2013
Subjects
Arrests
Cellular telephones
Jurisprudence
Law
Law enforcement
Privacy
Public policy
Search warrants
Supreme Court decisions
Verbal communication
United States > US
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Cell phones today have nearly the capabilities of a personal computer. A survey last year revealed that 88% of adults in the US own a cell phone, and 55% of all adult cell phone owners use their phones for Internet or email. In particular, the courts have not reached a consensus regarding the legality of warrantless cell phone searches incident-to-arrest. Part II of this paper addresses the history and justification of warrantless searches starting with Katz v. US, and exceptions to the general warrant requirement in Chimel v. California and Arizona v. Gant. Part III of this paper examines the array of approaches taken by the various courts that have addressed this issue, with emphasis on the reasons and justifications given by the various courts. Part IV explains that because the courts have failed to fully appreciate the extensive role cell phones play in modern society and the attendant expectation of privacy, existing jurisprudence fails to appropriately address cell phone searches incident-to-arrest.
ISSN:0360-151X
2162-8572