Search and Seizure — warrantless searches — cell phones

Listen to this article

U.S. Supreme Court

Criminal

Search and Seizure — warrantless searches — cell phones

The police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested.

Cell phones differ in both a quantitative and a qualitativesense from other objects that might be carried on an arrestee’s person. Notably, modern cell phones have an immense storage capacity. Before cell phones, a search of a person was limited by physical realities and generally constituted only a narrow intrusion on privacy. But cell phones can store millions of pages of text, thousands of pictures, or hundreds of videos. This has several interrelated privacy consequences. First, a cell phone collects in one place many distinct types of information that reveal much more in combination than any isolated record. Second, the phone’s capacity allows even just one type of information to convey far more than previously possible. Third, data on the phone can date back for years. In addition, an element of pervasiveness characterizes cell phones but not physical records. A decade ago officers might have occasionally stumbled across a highly personal item such as a diary, but today many of the more than 90% of American adults who own cell phones keep on their person a digital record of nearly every aspect of their lives. 13–132, reversed and remanded; No. 13–212, 728 F. 3d 1, affirmed.

13-132 Riley v. California

Roberts, C.J.; Alito, J., concurring.