Grower13
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,832
- Reaction score
- 139
DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) Think about all the personal information we keep in our cell phones: Its something to consider after the US Court of Appeal 7th circuit ruled it is now legal for police to search cell phones without a warrant.
Former Dallas FBI Agent Danny Defenbaugh said the ruling gives law enforcement a leg up. I think not only will it help them, but it could be life saving, said the former Special Agent, who was based in Dallas.
The decision stems from an Indiana case where police arrested a man for dealing drugs. An officer searched the suspects cell phone without warrant.
The judge in the appeal case, Judge Richard Posner, agreed that the officer had to search the phone immediately or risk losing valuable evidence. Judge Posner ruled it was a matter of urgency, arguing it was possible for an accomplice to wipe the phone clean using a computer or other remote device.
Defenbaugh says the ruling takes into account exigent or time-sensitive circumstances that could be life saving in more urgent cases, such as child abduction. If the child is alive and youre only minutes behind, that could be critical to recovering that child alive, added Defenbaugh.
Judge Posner ruled that the search was legal because the officer conducted a limited search and only looked for phone numbers associated with the alleged drug deal. The judge argued it was similar to flipping through a diary to search for basic information such as addresses and phone numbers.
Paul Coggins is the former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. Coggins says the courts ruling pushes the envelope on privacy issues and wonders if it opens the door to more extensive searches down the road. Does that mean officers now have the right to search through your phone, search through your search history, your photographs, your e-mails and the rest, because it could all be wiped clean, Coggins asked.
Many critics are asking the same question. They call the ruling an invasion of privacy that far outweighs the needs of law enforcement.
Both Defenbaugh and Coggins agree that the case is likely to go to the U.S. Supreme court.
Former Dallas FBI Agent Danny Defenbaugh said the ruling gives law enforcement a leg up. I think not only will it help them, but it could be life saving, said the former Special Agent, who was based in Dallas.
The decision stems from an Indiana case where police arrested a man for dealing drugs. An officer searched the suspects cell phone without warrant.
The judge in the appeal case, Judge Richard Posner, agreed that the officer had to search the phone immediately or risk losing valuable evidence. Judge Posner ruled it was a matter of urgency, arguing it was possible for an accomplice to wipe the phone clean using a computer or other remote device.
Defenbaugh says the ruling takes into account exigent or time-sensitive circumstances that could be life saving in more urgent cases, such as child abduction. If the child is alive and youre only minutes behind, that could be critical to recovering that child alive, added Defenbaugh.
Judge Posner ruled that the search was legal because the officer conducted a limited search and only looked for phone numbers associated with the alleged drug deal. The judge argued it was similar to flipping through a diary to search for basic information such as addresses and phone numbers.
Paul Coggins is the former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. Coggins says the courts ruling pushes the envelope on privacy issues and wonders if it opens the door to more extensive searches down the road. Does that mean officers now have the right to search through your phone, search through your search history, your photographs, your e-mails and the rest, because it could all be wiped clean, Coggins asked.
Many critics are asking the same question. They call the ruling an invasion of privacy that far outweighs the needs of law enforcement.
Both Defenbaugh and Coggins agree that the case is likely to go to the U.S. Supreme court.
